I’m not into telling others who to vote for. I’ve been told that my vote, one for Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson, is a vote for Donald Trump by some and a vote for Hillary Clinton by others, and I don’t appreciate either of those patently false accusations. I’ve seen voter intimidation and shaming happen to many people, and I hope these practices become rarer instead of normalized. Having had this experience myself, I have realized the cruelty of telling others what to do with the one ballot they receive every four years to determine who will lead the executive branch of our government. There is, however, a difference between telling someone what to do and reasoning with them politely and respectfully to attempt to get them to sympathize with your position. In this piece, I intend to put forth an argument that will result in you voting for anyone other than Hillary Clinton. Your vote is yours, and your reasons may lead you to different conclusions than mine, and that’s okay.
While Progressives, Conservatives, Socialists, Libertarians, Labor Unions, Capitalists, Greens, and Industrialists are typically prone to wanting to annihilate each other, Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy should unite us all against the common enemy that is her foreign policy. Whether your ultimate aim is to live in a Capitalistic America of individual Liberty, limited government, and free trade or a Socialist utopia of well-funded and generous equity programs combined with protectionist policies, your greatest political enemy in 2016 is Hillary Rodham Clinton.
While this is not the case in a typical nation, the USA’s most important issue is our relationship with nations abroad. After the two World Wars of the early 20th Century, America was thrust into the role of policing the world. The Soviet Union was the world’s only other big brother to turn to, but the brutal reign of Joseph Stalin made it clear that America was the relative good guy the majority of nations would be forced to align with.
With all of our competitors (Soviets, Germany, France, UK, Japan, China, etc.) severely depleted after the unthinkable violence and destruction of WWII, the United States had a unique opportunity to increase its wealth and standard of living in relation to the other nations. The US became so rich that it was able to afford to police the entire world from the Middle East to Vietnam to Korea to Cuba and to take a major role in collectively insuring and defending our allies through pacts like NATO and the United Nations.
In 1950, less than a decade after the end of WWII, the US accounted for around a quarter of the world’s share of GDP. In 1980, we owned about a fifth. Today, while we are still the world’s richest nation, we only control around one sixth of the world’s wealth. We are not on the verge of actually becoming a third world nation by any stretch of the imagination, and we should be grateful to live the privileged lives that we lead, but it should be abundantly clear that we are no longer the world’s outrageously rich uncle, at least when compared to the days of old.
We can’t afford to be the world’s bodyguards anymore. We need to come home and focus on our own stagnation and our own poor, unskilled, and misguided. Maybe one day we can make it back to a status of wealth so great that the cost of our services becomes expendable again. But for now, our $20 trillion debt, historically low workforce participation rate, and lowest GDP growth in recorded American history under Obama tell the story. We have to patch up our own windows for the time being.
Aside from the economic issues, the failures of our most recent foreign endeavors are embarrassing and arguably evil in their results. I have full confidence in saying the Vietnam War was well-intended. Communism posed a threat to the world, and its invasive nature was on clear display as the North of Vietnam bore down on the South. However well-intended, we wound up losing the war, much of our dignity and national pride, and so many of our own young people (not to mention about $1 trillion in 2016 dollars) as a result.
More recently, our interventions in the Middle East have been disastrous, and terrorism rises the more we try to stop it. Toppling secular foreign leaders in historically undemocratic nations has resulted in chaos in Libya, Yemen, and especially Iraq. Our involvement in the Syrian Civil War has aided in giving rise to ISIS, and we’re still occupying Afghanistan nearly two decades after our initial invasion.
Hillary Clinton wants to topple Syria’s president Bashar al-Assad, and wants to provoke Russia by ordering a no-fly zone above Syria. These policies should disqualify Hillary Clinton from being considered for president, and she is the only major candidate who supports these horrific ideas. We must learn from the mistakes of George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Clinton as the former Secretary of State and an Iraq War supporter when she was a Senator. Russia should not be our enemy any more. We’ve never even had a real military encounter with them! If we can side with Stalin to fight Hitler, we can certainly side with Putin to fight ISIS. And if Russia wants to go rogue to end the terrorist threat, that sounds fine too. If they gain the keys to influence in the Middle East in the process, that’s the way the cookie crumbles. Suicide via desire to control the Arab region is not an option a frustrated nation like ours can afford to take, and risking nuclear war with Russia to be the apple of the Arabs’ eyes is a wager no sane person should accept. We can’t have it all.
Hillary Clinton is not a Progressive. She is not for honest Democracy. And she is certainly nothing in the vicinity of a Conservative, Constitutionalist, or Libertarian either. She is a gross combination of the worst of all worlds. Clinton is a crony-Capitalist on economics, a neo-con on foreign policy, a social engineer and thought manipulator on domestic policy, a corrupt, deceitful, irresponsible member of the political elite, and is completely out of touch with the lives, needs, and values of everyday Americans. She is what 2016 should be a resounding rejection of.
Whether you vote on Election Day or vote early, I hope you will decide to vote against Clinton. I blame no one for being unable to stomach Donald Trump (ultimately, even if that disgust forces your hand to choose Clinton in the end), but I hope you will consider him or a third-party protest vote in the end. And while many will tell you otherwise, there is no shame in deciding not to vote at all. Participating in the electoral process is a right, not a responsibility.
Uniting against Hillary Clinton is the cry for freedom and recognition We the American People desperately need. Her defeat would beckon a new age of prosperity, independence, opportunity, and peace, and the elites would ignore us no more.