06/03/2008 (7:29 am)
Libertarian candidate Bob Barr handed a victory trophy to social progressives yesterday as he denounced the comments of white supremicists.
A vote for Bob Barr would at least send a message to the Republican Party that conservatives and Whites won’t sit still as they are stuck with a liberal presidential candidate like McCain.
Note “Whites.” The Barr campaign wasted no time in distancing themselves, releasing this statement:
The Barr campaign is not going to be a vehicle for every fringe and hate group to promote itself. We do not want and will not accept the support of haters. Anyone with love in their heart for our country and for every resident of our country regardless of race, religion, nationality or sexual orientation is welcome with open arms.
Tell the haters I said don’t let the door hit you on the backside on your way out!
Weigel adds this:
Barr consultant Steve Gordon sent me the statement and added: “We denounce anybody who doesn’t want to treat everybody equally under the law.”
The folks at Little Green Footballs, and all the commenters at Reason, are waving their fists and hooting “Right on!” — except for this one, who is wondering what I’m wondering. What I’m wondering is, assuming Barr receives enough attention that any other candidate cares what he thinks (which I regard as unlikely), what’s he going to say when the Obama campaign demands that he distance himself from Evangelicals, social conservatives, or even mainstream Republicans, all of whom have been branded “haters” by overweening leftists?
The left has been working overtime for decades to erase the moral foundations of Western civilization and replace them with the moral foundations of social progressivism, whose moral foundations are chosen, not by what is intrinsically right, but by what makes them look more moral than their neighbors. One of the means they use is shunning; they shun anybody who does not conform to their view of morality, and they insist that everybody else shun the same people.
I’m not a racist of any sort, nor am I a white supremicist, nor do I care to have anything to do with any such people. However, such people are enfranchised deliberately. They have a right to involve themselves in public debate, to support the candidate of their choice, to vote, to assemble, to run for office. The morals implied by our Constitution say they’ve a right to be involved. It’s the morals of the self-righteous progressives that say “Because you don’t believe what we believe, you have no right to participate.”
What Bob Barr has done here is announce to the world that he’s swallowed the moral preening of the hard left, hook, line, and sinker. And all of those endorsing his stance are announcing the same thing.
Rescuing Western civilization from the rot of progressivism will require the moral courage to stand up to their shaming and screeching and say “You do not have the right to dictate your way of thinking to the entire culture.” We must do this even on the matters where, by coincidence, their morals happen to coincide with real ones. (This is not to mention that their own hatred toward white males, conservatives, and Evangelicals is not substantially different from the hatred of white supremicists toward blacks.)
According to Weigel at Reason, Barr was differentiating himself from Ron Paul, who refused to return contributions from white supremicists, saying “I’d rather their money get spent supporting me than promoting racism.” His was the correct response. I refused to support Paul’s candidacy because he’s not competent and his foreign policy opinions were a triumph of 2-centuries-old, doctrinaire libertarianism; but I respected his willingness to tell social progressives to stuff it. Barr used to exhibit the same fire. I wonder where it went.