plusroot's Journal

Freedom of Association
Advocates of liberty, myself included, hold to the ideal of "freedom of association." The ideal starts with the observation that guilt does not flow through association. The ideal is often manifest in criminal law as the belief that the state should not judge an individual for simply knowing a criminal.

While the ideal is applicable to criminal law, it is not applicable to the voting process.

The converse is not true.

It is fair for individuals to weigh the associations of a candidate in their voting decision. For that matter, it is critical that voters scrutinize the associates of a candidate because it is likely that the candidate will appoint many of their associates into positions of power after the election.

In high profile campaigns, we aren't just electing an individual. We are electing a team that is identified by the candidate's name. We should scrutinize all the members of the team.

To re-iterate, the term "freedom of association" applies to the statement: The government should not judge individuals for their associations. The converse is not true. People tread a dangerous path when they back a team based solely on the reputation of the team's captain.

After all, it is not uncommon for a group with nafarious ends to put forward an unknown candidate with the hope that no-one inspect the intentions of the group.

This addage applies to all parties. Is applicable to both the primary and general elections. In many ways it is more applicable to primary elections, since this is where we choose the future direction of the a party.

Current Mood: contemplative

Advertisement