Who Should We Vote For?
Note: A commenter asked the following question: “Who should an Objectivist vote for?” The following is my reply:
At first, I must admit that I was reluctant to answer your question since honestly, none of the presidential candidates is worthy of the vote of a freedom-loving individual. Again, the electorate has no choice but to choose among a bunch of evils.
Lest I be misunderstood, I must share with you the kind of a leader that deserves the support not only of Objectivists, but also of every rational voter in this country. I support a presidential aspirant who honestly believes in the following:
- Laissez faire capitalism or the separation of the state and the economy;
- The only proper function of the government is to protect individual rights;
- Less taxes or no income tax (given the current setup in this country that favors taxation);
- No government controls or regulation on the economy;
- No to redistribution of wealth;
- Abolition of pork barrel and other government largesse to politicians and subsidies and grants to businessmen or cronies;
- Yes to privatization of postal offices, government owned and control corporations, and other government offices;
- No to politization of the issue of global warming and environmentalism.
- Abolition of non-functional and redundant government offices;
- Opposition to anti-trust bill and regulatory economic policies of the government;
- Opposition to socialized medicine, anti-population legislation, and anti-trust legislation;
- End insurgency, the Abu Sayyaf, and the MILF;
- Charter change (to limit the powers of the president and the government, abolish the party-list and multi-party system and all socialist provisions in the constitution, and allow the entry of foreign investors);
It is very unfortunate that all of the presidentiables are a bunch of compromisers, trapos (traditional politicians), and incompetents. I’ve read their platforms and all of them do not offer any concrete plan of action. In terms of economic matters, they merely recite platitudes of pleasant words and abstractions without giving any concrete plan of action. For instance, all of them say they are for job creation and economic progress. These are not concretes but merely abstractions. They all refuse to address the interrogative word “how!” How are they going to create jobs and achieve economic progress? What political-economic system is consistent with this goal? Can they achieve it by means of imposing more economic controls and regulations? Can they achieve it by means of imposing anti-trust laws to address what they call cement cartel, oil cartel, rice cartel, pharmaceutical cartel, and other alleged cartels in the country? More controls and regulations mean economic socialism. The Philippines is a mixed economy bordering on dictatorship.
Most of the economic platforms of the presidential candidates are mainly concerned with distribution, not production. All of them talk about giving more services to the poor, free and quality education, better health care, free access of women to reproductive health care, among others. These are matters related to redistribution of wealth. But none of them want to talk about production. All of them evade the issue that before there can be services and wealth to distribute, someone has to produce them. All of them are good at the “common good” aspect of their politics, but do not have any concrete plan when it comes to sound and reality-based economic platforms. Production is part of economic principles. All of their economic goals and visions are detached from reality.
For instance, leading candidates Noynoy Aquino, Manny Villar, Gilbert Teodoro, and Richard Gordon prattle on about creating jobs and improving the economy, but it appears that their policies call for more controls and regulations. This kind of policy is self-defeating, since more controls and regulations will, in the long run, result in economic catastrophe. This shows that all of the presidentiables are advocates of a mixed economy. Sad to say, it seems that none of the media anchors and the so-called intellectuals in this country would like to ask the right, proper questions. If you want to protect your freedom and rights, you must ask the position of the eight presidential candidates on the following matters:
- Are you in favor of more government controls and regulation into the economy?
- Would you favor redistribution of wealth?
- Would you pass a law to control population?
- Would you run after the alleged cartels in this country?
- Are you in favor of socialized medicine and universal health care?
- Are you against privatization?
- Would you focus more on public education rather than military and defense?
- Are you in favor of public education, public enterprise, public cooperatives, and more public offices and services?
- Would you impose more tax on the rich, the successful, and the productive people and grant tax credits to the poor?
- Would you focus on welfare programs and giving handouts and rations to the poor and the needy?
- Are you in favor of the nationalization of businesses and the industry?
- Would you impose government powers to solve the issue of global warming?
- Would you resort to more government spending to finance public works and welfare?
Now, if most, if not all, presidential candidates would answer YES to the questions above, then you may now know that this country is moving fast toward complete collectivism and dictatorship. If this is the case, our road to statism and dictatorship is only a matter of time.