Richard Ebeling emails:
I have a new article on “Donald and Hillary in Plunderland.”
Whether it is Clinton or Trump who enters the White House in January 2017, they will have perhaps the highest disapproval rating of anyone just becoming president.
A sizable majority of voters are frustrated, fearful, and forlorn about the prospect having either Hillary or Donald winning this presidential election, and many, according to the polls, will be voting more against someone than for a candidate they really are positive about.
However, what needs to be kept in mind is that regardless of who wins, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are cut from the same interventionist-welfare state political cloth. They may pander and promote different coalitions of special interest and ideological groups, but both will use the power of the state to benefit some at the expense of others.
This includes in the realm of foreign policy, as well. Hillary and Donald will still maintain a foreign policy of political and military interventionism, but of different sorts and focus.
What have been lost in this election-year charade are the most fundamental issues concerning individual liberty and the role of government in free society. Alas, too many of our fellow citizens are happy with the interventionist-welfare state, as long as the plundering and paternalism serves those people and causes of which they approve.
If government were limited to the narrow and specific functions originally designed for in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, it would matter very little if a president was personally obnoxious and rude and crude, because that persona would have no role or responsibility beyond protection of each individual’s rights, rather than violating them.
It’s precisely because whoever is president becomes the plunderer and paternalist-in-chief that so many find offensive who it may be who sits in the Oval Office.