Politics Platform Comparison	Principles The Environment Hidden Agenda	Mortgaged Future Hall of Shame You're Wrong	Pamphlet Announcement Speech	FAQs Bio Site Map

Campaign Speech

Who I Am

• I'm Brian Holtz. I'm a software engineer at Yahoo.
  
• I live in San Carlos with my wife and two young daughters.
  

Why I'm Running: 3 Reasons

• 1. The Republicans blatantly threaten our personal liberties.
• 2. The Democrats clumsily interfere with our economic liberties.
• 3. Both incumbent parties put special interests ahead of the general interest.
• Therefore, I'm running so voters can cast a clear and unambiguous vote for a principled alternative.
  

Five Points I'd Like To Make

1. Politics is about principles, not problem-solving
   
2. Voting is about principles, not tipping the election outcome
   
3. The primary principles of Freedom and Security are in conflict
   
4. Liberal and Conservative are just 2 of 4 possible positions
   
5. There are 2 other ways to combine those principles
   

1. Politics is about principles, not problem-solving

• As a congressman I would not
  
• work hard, roll up my sleeves, or get under the hood
  
• clean up the mess in Washington, or apply common sense, or my engineering skills
• treat government like a business
  
• If effectively governing a society were just a matter of problem-solving, then
  
• Some society would have figured out how to do it sometime in humanity's 2500 yrs of recorded history
• Politicians pretend it is, because there is no voter whose vote they don't want
• I admit that some voters should not vote for me, as I'll explain in a minute
  
• Legislating is not like engineering or business
• Engineering is value-neutral
  
• You tell the engineer the goal, and she minimizes the costs of achieving it
  
• Business has a single value: profit
• Legislating is primarily about reconciling competing principles and competing interests
• Ideal legislator would have degrees in law and economics, and maybe history and  philosophy
  
• (Ideal president or governor would also have executive experience, but I'm not running for that.)
  
• I do not have such degrees. Luckily, neither do my opponents.
  

2. Voting is about principles, not tipping the election outcome

• All votes are "wasted", in the sense that no single vote ever decides a significant election.
  
• If such an election came down to one vote, there would be a recount, and the winning margin would almost surely no longer be one vote.
• An individual vote has so little influence that economists have given a name to the problem of why seemingly rational people bother to vote: the voter's paradox.
• Because of a desire to identify with the social groups having a similar opinion.
  
• I.e. to feel good about yourself
• So ask yourself: do you feel better voting for the lesser of two evils, or voting your principles?
  

3. The primary principles of Freedom and Security are in conflict

• The 2 most imporant political principles are Freedom and Security
  
• Conflict: the more secure you are, the less free. The more free, the less secure.
• There can be freedom to speak or security from hearing unpleasant speech, but not both.
• There can be freedom to hire or security from being fired, but not both.
• We have 2 conflicting political principles and 2 conflicting political parties; how do they relate?
• They're not one-to-one, so something else must be going on here
  

4. Liberal and Conservative are just 2 of 4 possible positions

• Ls & Cs are schizophrenic about the 2 principles
  
• For some strange reason, they both react differently to economic vs. personal issues
• Economic issues are about property and labor
• Personal issues are about substances, sensations, and expression
  
• Liberals advocate economic security but personal liberty. Liberals believe that economic liberty is dangerous because economically weak people will too readily agree to transactions that are noncoercive but that liberals think are unfair.
• Example: minimum wage
• Repeat
  
• Conservatives advocate economic liberty but personal security. Conservatives believe that personal liberty is dangerous because morally weak people will too readily engage in behaviors that are noncoercive but that conservatives think are immoral.
• Example: drugs
• Repeat
  
• Liberal: economically weak => unfair choices
• Conservative: morally weak => immoral choices
• As a consquence, both want to limit the relevant freedom
  
• Not totally insane positions to take. If either is your position, then don't vote for me.
  

5. There are 2 other ways to combine those principles

• Third is fortunately not very popular: totalitarianism
• advocates both economic and personal security, e.g. Communism and Fascism
• Fourth way: libertarianism
• advocates both economic and personal freedom
• Lots of reasons why economic and personal freedom work out best, but that's a much longer speech
• Recognizing that there is an alternative to liberal/conservative is usually all it takes
  

Conclusion

• When you hear linear talk of Left/Right, Liberal/Conservative => remember the Libertarian alternative that they're failing to tell you about
  
• (Don't remember the 4th totalitarian alternative of fascism/communism; I don't want to find out that my speech created any Nazis.)
  
• Liberals think government should be our nanny. Conservatives think government should be our chaperone. Libertarians think government should just be our referee and lifeguard.