You are on page 1of 5

The Campbell-Yu Presidential Platform

Daniel Campbell: Representing the Individualist Party. Advocates a social structure which
allows personal and market freedoms to flourish to the utmost degree. The Government’s role in
society is to protect the freedom of “The People.” Any and all other actions taken by the
Government are beyond their natural boundaries which stand in a free society. Robert J.
McCracken once said: “We on this continent should never forget that men first crossed the
Atlantic not to find soil for their ploughs but to secure liberty for their souls.” A human has
rights because they are human. Aristotle describes this as “man qua man.” Latin, meaning what
makes a man a man: which is the ability to use reason and conceptualize and interpret reality. It
is natural for the only governing thing over humans: reason, to provide boundaries for a man.
Those boundaries should not be intruded by government, lest it should be overthrown. A man
cannot be truly happy in the absence of freedom; William Wallace is quoted as saying: “every
man dies, not every man really lives.” For a man, for society to thrive there must not be
obstacles imposed by government in either the market or in their personal lives. The
Individualist Party will take steps to eliminating the role of Government in all unnecessary areas.
Taxes will be a flat rate, meaning every income will be taxed the same percentage year round.
Government funding will sustain serious cuts in areas deemed useless or damaging to society.
Military funding, however, will remain to steadily increase to ensure the Government will always
be able to protect its citizens. Scientific advances which will better the standard of living or
proved significant use will be funded. All Federal Reserve’s on land, oil, and research/testing
will be uprooted. Welfare will be eliminated along with social security: the elderly will live the
remainder of their lives off of their own investments, should that dwindle: their children and
independent charity programs. A man will have to hold himself up his entire life by his own
merit. Economic Darwinism will establish a system which elicits the best of what the market has
to offer and trade bloom. Adlai Stevenson once said “My definition of a free society is a society
where it is safe to be unpopular.”

Benjamin Yu: Representing the Accountability Party. Believes in a system of governance in

which capitalism may prosper and general inherent rights of citizens are protected, such as
freedom of speech and press. However, government’s role in society should by no means be
limited to mere “protection” or bureaucracy and red tape organization. Rather, American society
should generally aim to become more efficient upon itself, through a more selective means of
membership. Citizenship will be taken to be something of a merited privilege, and only those
who prove themselves worthy will be granted citizenship, through a process of determining their
value as productive members of society. Hence, stricter regulations on immigration are naturally
in order, as well as regulations on birth. Only those who prove themselves capable will be given
the privilege of childbirth and rearing, as demonstrated through financial, intellectual, and
emotional means. Consequently, fines will be given for any pregnancy that requires government
intervention (there will be a grace period allotted for private abortion), and abortion will be
instated in a mandatory manner as per standardized guidelines. This policy will be enacted with
the general guideline of creating a more responsible society, one with more productive members
and significantly less harmful deviation in such forms as social alienation and general crime. The
same system of merit will hold for determining immigration laws, in which only qualified
immigrants who have proven themselves beneficial to society or show promise to do so will be
allowed to partake in American citizenship. This plan will be slowly instated over a gradual
period of time, allowing people time to slowly adjust and adapt to its guidelines, in almost a
recreation of natural selection and the general principles of competition (applied in such manners
as in the core founding justifications of capitalism), pushing each citizen to be his best in order to
earn the privilege of propagation. Naturally, there will always be a lower class and a higher class,
and quite possibly a “middle class” between the two, but the general proof of concept for the
nation will provide that all classes will maintain a constant state of improvement, to where all
may find their rightful place in society, as determined on the basis of merit. While merit is not
necessarily the best unit of measure for equality, it is the most effective in encouraging constant
advancement and the betterment of the human race, and is therefore justified as use as the
defining factor in determining class and privilege. Hence, opportunity will be preserved, and a
large role of government, after a majority of this plan has been put into practice, will be in
ensuring this fundamental opportunity, through a general program of social welfare. This welfare
will, of course, apply only to citizens, and any who prove themselves at any point to have
become unworthy and undeserving of such welfare as realized through comprehensive testing to
have a high likelihood of being more detrimental than beneficial to the overall improvement of
society will be taken off the roll for welfare. Hence, government will become more involved in
protecting the welfare of its citizens, but maintain its emphasis on capitalism. A proportional tax
rate will be instated as well, where the tax gets proportionally larger with an increase in income.
As for recycling, a program will be made where one is mandatorily obliged to recycle. This will
be part of a general wide scale plan to reduce waste and gross misuse of resources, while
maintaining an emphasis on consumerism. Humans have no intrinsic rights – the logic behind the
argument to the contrary is generally fallacious or non-existent to begin with. Hence, all
arguments stemming from this basic underlying “postulate” are invalidated as null, as the
postulate itself is flawed. Government was created with the self-interests of every one person as
an individual, as a government and order proved necessary in a community in order for growth,
advancement, and prosperity. By all means, a man has the right to attempt whatsoever he pleases,
but he lacks and rightfully should lack and guarantee in regards to the success of this right.
Government, as well noted by John Locke, was formed to protect the collective property of the
people and their own individual selves, as a collective punishing force was a far more successful
deterrent to mutually undesirable crime of a society as opposed to individual punishment and
retribution and violence. Hence, a man by all means has the right to attempt the murder of
another man, but he does this with the full knowledge that he will face punishment at the hands
of government, which is the true deterrent in disallowing him to do so. This is a fundamental
premise around which many concurrent arguments in this general platform revolve around.

Thoughts on Change:

Yes, we are lucky to be here, but that is not something to be used as justification for others. Yes,
the opportunity existed for us, but that does not mean it should exist indefinitely, as a result, for
everyone else, simply so that they might have the same opportunity as us, the same sort of luck,
and maintain “equality”.

Duo-Presidency: Benjamin Yu and Daniel Campbell act as one executive power: the president.
Although both men are in office, they will act as one respective power. All actions made by
Presidency will require the approval and signature of both Daniel Campbell and Benjamin Yu.
Any action of one may be restricted by the veto of the other. Each allotted president will appoint
his own cabinet which will work only for him. This system of government is designed to allow
for a maximum amount of representation in office. Rather than having an all-or-nothing system,
the duo-presidency allows two dominant parties to work in harmony with one another rather than
to work at odds against one another. With the goal of ultimate unity and well-rounded policy
making as the result of having several alternative views, a duo-presidency proves ultimately to
be the best choice for the United States, and the Campbell-Yu ticket to be the most qualified to
fulfill such a choice.

Issue Stances:

1. Global Climate Change

Ben – This is very real and must be dealt with accordingly. The implications of global climate
change on the future of the human race are very alarming, and must be addressed immediately.
As this is a global crisis, this is a task for the global community to jointly undertake in solving,
and the United States must wholeheartedly devote itself to aiding the coalition of the human race
throughout the world in solving this problem as one unified force. Regardless of whether or not
the change has been propelled primarily because of human interference, the phenomenon itself is
undeniable, and will wreak its damage just the same, and therefore must be addressed with no
regard to actual cause.
Danny – Global Climate Change is in the least affected by human presence. It is scientifically
supported that Global Warming is not a derivation of humans, and is not propelled by humans.
Evidence reveals (all other planets in solar system are warming at same rate as Earth) that Global
Climate Change is an effect of solar activity. No actions must be made, a natural cycle will take
place and we will swing back naturally in years to come.

2. Affirmative Action
Ben – Fully for, with changes. There is a strong argument for discrimination versus minorities,
and depending on which course of action is taken with other aspects of the campaign (such as the
gradual elimination of those who are more of a burden than benefit), affirmative action is
absolutely necessary. Affirmative action will not apply, however, solely on the basis of race,
gender, and socio-economic class, but on a scale of variable “potential”, as determined by careful
analysis of each individual situation as subjected to a standardized study on the likely outcomes
given such a situation. Hence, someone with perhaps a lower objective score on such merits as
standardized tests and grade point averages but with a significant disadvantage in terms of
discrimination and class, with have all factors accounted for on a scaling system, and, after
judging the personal attributes of the person and determining his or her likelihood of success in
future life, may win a position over someone who is currently more objectively qualified but less
likely to obtain the same level of success in later life due to lesser potential on an overall skill, no
matter how more fully fulfilled that potential may be in the current time. Hence, a system in
which personal attributes, test scores, and socio-economic status are all numericalized and
measured on the same scale makes general sense, and affirmative action, once implemented with
these specifications and changes, will clearly be the best plan for the United States. The general
controversies rising from such measurements of things such supposedly subjectively
demonstrated “personal attributes” will be proven null over a gradual period of implementation,
study, and refinement in the system which will measure the success of graduates in the system
adjust the system accordingly to provide the highest ratio of success in later life.
Danny – Affirmative action is the Government stepping into a free society and controlling the
system in which a University uses to engage students. If the leaders of a University believe that
a person’s potential is greater that another’s in spite of test scores, it is at their discretion.
Affirmative Action by the Government conflicts with Freedom, and must not be a Government

3. Censorship
Ben – Censorship is a dangerous place to go, yet to go there is absolutely necessary. Whilst free
speech and other acts of free exploration are essential for change, advancement, and a generally
healthy society, too much freedom will always prove counterproductive. The line is indeed thin
between too much censorship and too little, as the two are virtually right next to each other.
Resultantly, precautions will be taken to ensure that one has just enough freedoms, but not too
many. The system should be broad, operating under a generally lenient system with no
immediate breaches of privacy, through the philosophy that anything threatening enough to be
potentially harmful on a noticeable scale will be easily noticed without micromanagement and
invasion of privacy techniques. Government is naturally entitled to a right to attempt to preserve
itself (note the attempt – not the actual right to preservation itself), and the people are naturally
entitled to an attempt to ensure the government’s optimal interests in the people. Thus, the
general philosophy of censorship practices are set and specific censorship guidelines will be set
through a procedure of experiment, experience, and statistical analysis to determine the optimal
“safety” to “privacy” and “right of free expression” ratio.
Danny – Censorship is an act of Government which infringes on The People’s freedoms. The
Government is indeed entitled to a right to attempt to preserve itself, although the Campbell
portion of the Campbell-Yu ticket will be fighting for The People from a seat in the Executive.
The extent of censorship should only be to protect The People. Military and select political
secrets may be kept for the integrity of the military and safety of The People.

4. Immigration
Ben – Immigration will, if not already, become a serious issue in this age of exponential
replication potential, and therefore merits serious consideration and analysis. Ultimately, a much
more secure restriction on illegal immigration becomes the clear best choice for our generally
isolated nation. Plans for immigration must not only stop there, however, but also turn to manage
legal immigration quotas more efficiently and in a more productive manner. Only those who
have proven themselves, again, to likely be far more of a benefit to society rather than a burden
to the same, will be allowed access to our nation. Immigration will become a privilege earned by
those with merit, much like how reproduction will ultimately become in the future.
Danny – America belongs to free men, and exists as a dwelling for those who wish to be free.
Any person who wishes to be free may come to America, legally so they can exist as a part of the
society. They may be free and live in America so long as they pay taxes like every other citizen.
To have a population exist in a society and not pay the fee and sacrifice the rights that are
required yields a problem. It should be made simple to become a legal citizen and there should
be no limit to the number of immigrants which are allowed to come.

5. Drugs
Ben – Legislation regarding drugs is tricky, but decisive action must be taken regardless of the
risk, for the damage without legislation is certain and by far surpasses the risk assumed by
waging war on drugs. Action must be taken to ensure that the spread of drugs is sufficiently
minimized, and possibly even eliminated. Stricter control on drugs should be instated, with a
possible death penalty for those found dealing in drugs and actively encouraging its propagation.
Anyone found perusing narcotics will be jailed in solitary confinement until the effects of
withdrawal from the narcotics are generally extinct. Drugs will be defined as any substance with
a demonstrated detrimental effect on the body not overshadowed in use of the instance by any
objectively measurable benefit. The same will go with alcohol, with a gradual prohibition
introduced to disallow any from beginning the habit, though those who have already been
acquainted with the habit will be allowed to continue, on a limited and restricted scale, which
will progressively reduce in scope. The same will go for smoking, and any other widespread drug
used to the point where immediate deprivation is impractical and unlikely to succeed.
Danny – A person harms only themselves when they decide to smoke, use drugs, or consumes
alcohol so long as they don’t get behind the wheel of a car or place themselves in any position in
which they can harm others. A responsible user of drugs should not be at risk of being punished
by the Government. Also, in legalized drugs, the underground trade would eventually diminish
and the dangerous nature of it will no longer claim the lives of many members of the lower class.
The Government does not have the natural authority to illegalize drugs, thus they should be

Issue Stances
*Abortion – | Pro – Danny | Pro Mandatory – Ben
*Gay Marriage – | Pro – Mutual
*Death Penalty – | Pro – Mutual
*Gun Control – | Anti – Danny | Currently Impartial – Ben
*Affirmative Action – | Anti – Danny | Pro – Ben
*Separation of Church and State – | Pro – Mutual
*Gambling – | Pro – Danny | Currently Impartial – Ben
*Censorship – | Anti – Danny | Anti, With Exceptions – Ben
*Adoption – | Pro – Mutual, With Exceptions
*Child Abuse – | Anti – Mutual, With Exceptions
*National Health Care Plan – | Anti – Danny | Currently Undecided – Ben
*Narcotics – | Pro – Danny | Anti – Ben
*Illegal Immigration – | Anti – Mutual
*Stem Cell Research – | Pro – Mutual
*English as Official Language – | Pro – Mutual
*Hate Crimes – | Anti – Mutual
*Smoking – | Pro – Danny | Anti – Ben
*Medical Ethics – | Anti, With Exceptions – Mutual
*War on Terror – | Pro – Danny | Anti – Ben
*Endangered Species – | Anti, With Exceptions – Mutual
*Global Warming – | Anti – Danny | Pro – Ben
*Alcohol – | Legal at Eighteen – Danny | Currently Undecided – Ben
*Tax Plan – | Flat Proportional Tax – Danny | Variable Tax Plan – Ben