LibertyBuzz: You are seeking the nomination to be the Libertarian Party candidate for President of the United States. Yours is not exactly a household name. Please fill our readers in on a little bit of your background that led you to this point.I’ve spent most of my adult life as an activist for liberty. I’m an
Darryl W. Perry: I’ve spent most of my adult life as an activist for liberty. I’m an award-winning author, publisher & radio/TV host. I’m a regular contributor to several weekly and monthly newspapers, I host several podcasts, and I’m a regular co-host on Free Talk Live, the largest nationally syndicated libertarian radio show. I’m also the Owner/Managing Editor of Free Press Publications, a business I started in June, 2009 with the purpose of ensuring a FREE PRESS for the FREEDOM MOVEMENT.
I discussed some of my background in my keynote address at Keenevention in November 2015. Video available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaiaLpxHwrY
LB: Is it fair to say that you see your campaign as more educational than political in nature?
DP: I do not believe it is fair to say that. Though I do believe the primary reason for anyone to be involved in politics is to spread a message, mine is the message of liberty.
LB: What does libertarianism mean to you?Libertarianism is the belief that all people have
DP: Libertarianism is the belief that all people have equal right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness as long as there is no unjust harm done to another. Libertarianism is the belief that no person or group has more rights than any other person or group. No person can delegate a right they don’t possess to another person, and no group can claim a right not possessed by any member of the group. Further, since no group of people can have more rights than any individual member of the group, no group can revoke the rights of any other person or group. Therefore, any law, regulation, statute, or other dictate can not rightly infringe on the rights of any person.
LB: Do you adhere to the Non-Aggression Principle? Why or why not?
DP: I strive to live in accordance with the Non-Aggression Principle, which is really just a rewording of the Golden Rule – reiterated in the Greatest Commandment. And I fully comply with the Libertarian Pledge, the statement I signed when I joined the Libertarian Party, which states: “I hereby certify that I do not believe in or advocate the initiation of force as a means of achieving political or social goals.”
LB: Do you consider yourself an anarchist and what in your opinion is the relationship between anarchism and libertarianism?
DP: I do not generally use the term to describe myself, I prefer the term “voluntarist” which Merriam-Webster defines as “the principle or system of doing something by or relying on voluntary action or volunteers.” In other words, the belief that all human interaction should be consensual, which is completely in line with the Non-Aggression Principle.
LB: Historically, some anarchists have resorted to violence to achieve their ends. Do you think violent revolution or resistance to government is ever justified?
DP: I support peaceful non-cooperation. Further, I reiterate the Libertarian Pledge which states: “I hereby certify that I do not believe in or advocate the initiation of force as a means of achieving political or social goals.”
LB: In the recent debate you said that if you become president, you will abolish or disband the United States. How would this be done? Why is that your goal, and do you feel your pursuit of the nation’s highest office is contradictory to that stance?
DP: 1) I would have to work with Congress to authorize self-determination votes for the 50 states, 5 populated territories, and the people of the 567 federally recognized Native American tribes. These votes of self-determination would ask voters: “Should (insert state/territory/tribe) be an independent country?” Many people forget the Soviet Union peacefully dissolved on December 26, 1991 after all of the republics seceded from that union, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev resigned, declared his office extinct, and handed over his powers to Russian President Boris Yeltsin. I realize the former Soviet Union is not a country a supporter of liberty should look to as an example, thought it is an example of a country dissolving without violent revolution.
2) The United States federal government is the largest terrorist organization on the planet. Terrorism being defined by Merriam-Webster as “the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal.” The United States federal government is responsible for an untold number of civilian deaths around the globe, has a debt that can never be repaid, and has consistently violated the rights of people around the world, both inside and outside of the United States. I honestly believe the world would be a safer place absent this one particular government.
3) The goal of my Presidential campaign is to spread the ideas of liberty and encourage people to have conversations about issues that many consider taboo (full legalization of all substances, repeal of all laws criminalizing behavior without a victim, secession, etc).
LB: What is your view of the United States Constitution and its framers? Should Americans abide by the original document or amend it to address changing times? Why or why not?
DP: 1) To quote Lysander Spooner, “[the constitution] has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.”
2) People should only be governed by a government to which they give express consent. That means that no document, however new or old, should be used to control a person who does not agree to be governed in such manner. I believe that every person and/or group of people should be allowed to decide for themselves if and/or how they will be governed.
LB: Do you consider yourself a patriot, and what is your opinion on nationalism?
DP: 1) At one time I used the term “patriot” to describe myself and based my usage on the quotes “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism” & “A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.” However I’ve not used the term in many years.
2) Nationalism is dangerous, as it encourages people to take pride in something over which they had no control. It also encourages people to look upon their fellow humans as lesser people because they were, through no fault of their own, born in a different geographic area.
LB: The Libertarian Party platform states: “We support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property?” Do you agree with that? Why or why not?
DP: I do not agree with that sentence, and instead fully support the first three sentences of that plank of the platform which states, “We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders.”
My campaign platform states:
“I believe that people should be allowed to travel freely without government interference. This includes the right of individuals to choose where they decide to live.
Current federal immigration laws are convoluted and give preferential treatment to individuals from certain countries. The current system also relies on quotas, hosts and in some cases an immigration lottery, as well as preferred treatment to athletes and refugees. This must change, and there should be one uniform immigration law. I believe the best model law is the “wet foot, dry foot rule” in place for people fleeing Cuba. Under this rule, anyone from Cuba who makes it safely into the United States, is allowed to stay; however, the aspect of this rule that I would end is that the Coast Guard patrols the waters looking for people with “wet feet” in order to redirect them back to Cuba. The immigration policy of the United States of America should once again resemble the words written on the Statue of Liberty
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!””
LB: What is your view of medical freedom? Is there ever any justification for vaccinating or quarantining people against their will?
DP: 1) I support the existence of free-market certifications and believe such certifications are helpful to those looking for qualified health care.
I believe that individuals should be free to choose the medical care they believe is best for themselves. This includes the freedom to seek alternative forms of treatment, such as holistic, homeopathic, chiropractic, acupuncture, shaman, or any other form of treatment they choose. Governments should not mandate what qualifies someone to give medical treatment, nor should any government use force, or the threat of force, to prevent an individual from seeking treatment from an “unqualified” practitioner.
I support the repeal/abolition of the FDA, Medicare, Medicaid, forced vaccination, mandatory health insurance laws, and any other governmental dictate that interferes with than individuals right to choose the medical care the wish to seek.
2) In some apocalypse type scenario there may be justification for quarantining someone, though I prefer to deal in reality instead of hypotheticals. Further, I can think of no valid reason to vaccinate someone against their will.
LB: Dr. Ron Paul has stated: “Abortion on demand is the ultimate State tyranny; the State simply declares that certain classes of human beings are not persons, and therefore not entitled to the protection of the law. The State protects the “right” of some people to kill others, just as the courts protected the “property rights” of slave masters in their slaves.” Do you agree? Why or why not?
DP: I find abortion to be abhorrent and something that I wish would cease to exist. That said, there are valid arguments on all sides of the topic, and questions that will never be answered: Whose rights prevail: that of the mother or the unborn child? Can a mother evict an unborn child she decides is trespassing?
Those questions aside, the issue of abortion serves no purpose but to divide people on an issue that will never be solved through the political process.
LB: I assume you have no issue with individuals arming themselves for their own individual defense from aggression? Any objection to people voluntarily joining together for their common defense?
DP: I have no issue with people defending themselves, or preparing to defend themselves, nor do I object to people joining with others to defend themselves.
LB: If you were somehow successful in dissolving the United States, what would you do with America’s nuclear triad?
DP: I would prefer to see the nuclear weapons safely destroyed so that no one could use them. Absent such destruction, I would presume that as with all assets claimed by the federal government, they should become the property of the state in which they are located.
LB: Are there any rival candidates for the presidency in or out of the Libertarian Party that you admire? If you are not the nominee, do you pledge to support the party’s nominee?
DP: 1) Though I may not agree with their policies or the way they conduct their campaign, I have a certain level of respect for everyone seeking the LP nomination.
2) On of the goals of my campaign is to give as many people as possible the chance to vote for an actual libertarian in November 2016. I will only support a candidate I believe is a consistent libertarian.