NOTE: While I did support certain candidates in the 2019–20 Democratic primaries because of their ideas (e.g. UBI, anti-war, broad tent approach), it doesn't mean I endorse their other positions.
Out of all the candidates running for the Democratic primary, Tulsi Gabbard is perhaps the most interesting. For some reason, she seems to have strong support on both the left and the right, like from Bernie supporters and Trump supporters alike. She is therefore hugely popular on social media, but mainstream media has continued to ignore her, perhaps deliberately. From what I see, Tulsi is the candidate most consistent with my classical liberal values. Indeed, I would argue that Tulsi Gabbard is probably one of the most promising candidates we have ever seen from either party, for those of us who support individual freedom.
The first and foremost reason why Tulsi Gabbard is good for liberty is that she is anti-war. Like, this is the centerpiece of her candidacy. A few other people may be anti-war as part of their platform, but for Tulsi, this is her signature issue. And I think this is very important. While bigger names like Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders have been consistently anti-war, a lot more of their energy have been spent on other issues. People with limited attention spans may have focused more on Ron Paul's libertarian politics or Bernie's Medicare For All and free college, for example, those being their signature issues. But if Tulsi makes it as far as the big debates, we will have somebody who represents ending the pro-war consensus first and foremost. In other words, there will be plenty of air time for this issue. The pro-war consensus has gone on for too long and has been largely resistant to change. Even the new anti-war consciousness that developed in the wake of the second Iraq War couldn't make the establishment budge. I mean, I was a college freshman at the time, and many of us did whatever we can to oppose the war. Many students even skipped classes to protest. We thought that we could change things. But now, in our thirties, we realise that we changed nothing at all. Change is hard to come by, when it comes to America's pro-war consensus. If putting a dent in the pro-war consensus is the only classical liberal gain in this election cycle, I think for many of us just that would be enough to happy about.
While Tulsi Gabbard is anti-war, she is tough on the issue of terrorism. Some have sought to paint her as inconsistent, or even Islamophobic. But I don't see any inconsistency here. Endless, costly wars are bad for everyday Americans. They needlessly cost the lives of soldiers, and throw away taxpayers' money for nothing. Putting an end to this is good for everyday Americans, and good for individual liberty. On the other hand, people around the world are living in fear of terrorism. To be tough on terrorism is to understand the serious impact this issue is having on everyday Americans, and indeed citizens around the world, especially in the West. To be tough on terrorism is to uphold individual liberty, by definition. Terrorism is pure evil, and it knows no bounds of decency. The 2017 Manchester attacks were the clearest demonstration of this. It targeted a concert attended mostly by young girls, it was an attack deliberately targeted on the most vulnerable in society, in other words. If the 2017 Manchester attacks don't make you hate terrorism with all your guts, I have to question your humanity indeed. Terrorism deserves the most severe response from our leaders, nothing less. This is also not Islamophobic, as many victims of terrorism have been Muslim, including in the 2017 Manchester attacks.
There has been a lot of controversy over Tulsi Gabbard's past homophobic comments. It is true that she used to be strongly against gay marriage, but then, so were most of us, at least before 2004 or so. Personally, I fully accept that I used to oppose gay rights at some point in the past, and just like Tulsi, I fully apologize for that. On the other hand, many people out there are not that honest, preferring to obscure their past position and pretend that they have always been allies. I think we should reward honesty over hypocrisy. Furthermore, it is important to look at why Tulsi changed her mind. Plenty of people out there began to support gay marriage when they sensed that the majority was now OK with it. That is, they just followed the majority wherever it went, in an unprincipled way. If people turned against gay marriage tomorrow, they would also probably revert to their previous position. People outside politics have more readily owned up to this, but I suspect many politicians were just the same. On the other hand, Tulsi changed her mind after serving in Iraq, after seeing why it is a bad idea to enforce views of personal morality on citizens, as they do in theocracies. For Tulsi, it is a matter of America being a nation founded in liberty, in contrast to those authoritarian theocracies we find elsewhere in the world. It is on this important matter of principle that Tulsi changed her mind on gay marriage. This demonstrates her commitment to the values of individual liberty that is the foundation of classical liberalism, and in turn also the foundation of America itself.
Furthermore, Tulsi Gabbard has also shown that she respects religious freedom, in a way that many contemporary politicians do not. She has insisted that it is unacceptable to question the religious background of people for public office. I think her background as a religious minority has perhaps highlighted the importance of religious freedom for her. In a time where religious freedom has come under threat from both the left and the right, it is more important than ever to have leaders who will be steadfast on this issue.
Finally, I understand that Tulsi Gabbard also supports many other policies aligned with traditional classical liberal objectives, including ending the War On Drugs and criminal justice reform, things which have the support of the majority of Americans, but the political class is still by and large resisting. Concluding my case for supporting Tulsi Gabbard as a classical liberal, I think that any liberty loving individual will find a lot to agree with when looking at her policies. It is indeed uncommon to have a candidate who ticks so many boxes on our wishlist. I wish Tulsi the best of luck going forward, and she will probably need it, because the media continues to be biased against her.
