3 ms·
He's a traditional U.S. states' rights conservative, an ideal intersecting with classical liberalism - less common these days due to the widespread influence of
by vezzy-fnord 12y ago
He's a traditional U.S. states' rights conservative, an ideal intersecting with classical liberalism - less common these days due to the widespread influence of neoconservatism.
He doesn't really touch on deeper libertarian or even minarchist philosophy at all. His stringent views on border security are also unusual for it (unless you're Hans-Hermann Hoppe).
His platform ultimately rests on anti-federalism.
- researcher88 12y agoDon't you mean federalism? A lot of people seem to use it to signify states rights and a balance of power. Such as the historian podcaster Dan Carlin. Edit- I can't reply below but you are using the term incorrectly and in the context of Anti-Federalists from the 18th century. From Wikipedia on federalism: > In contrast, Europe has a greater history of unitary states than North America, thus European "federalism" argues for a weaker central government, relative to a unitary state. The modern American usage of the word is much closer to the European sense.
- morgante 12y agoNo, federalism is what led to having a federal government in the first place (binding together the states into a nation). The anti-federalists advocated for states rights and against a strong federal government.