The entire country knew what the Democrats' response to President Trump’s strikes on the Iranian nuclear facilities would be. The minute they were announced, like clockwork Democrats emerged from the woodworks, condemning his actions as hawkish and unconstitutional. Officially kicking off their nationwide campaign, Democrats broadcasted this as the first reason to rob the Republicans’ control of Congress in 2026.
Though it was neither Trump’s action or the Democrats’ reaction that captured my attention as I so diligently monitored the situation on X (for which President Trump thanked me and my peers for doing so honorably and attentively), but Thomas Massie’s complete freakout session over the matter as well.
“Massie 2028” proclaimed a post by Next Wave America (a rather questionable X account). This came in the midst of Thomas Massie’s accusations of brazen unconstitutionality on the Trump administration’s behalf, of which the Kentucky Representative proudly asserted on every platform he possibly could.
Realizing the 25,000 likes this post had gotten, I began to consider the possible achievements of Massies’ that, in the eyes of at least 25,000 people, would render him appropriate for the most powerful job in the world. I have never been a loyal follower of his, so, assuming I had missed a grand achievement of his that had changed the course of the country, I decided to do some research.
Long story short, I found nothing.
Massie attended MIT. Massie is one of 435 representatives. Massie chaired a subcommittee on the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust. Massie has a history of standing in Trump’s way, whether he was president or not. Albeit, these are all undoubtedly impressive accomplishments (or at least ones that vindicate his elevated presence in politics), but what exactly about these positions has made him worthy of a presidential nomination in the eyes of so many people?
I still have yet to find an answer to my question. However, to an extent, it does not matter anyway. In the present situation, Thomas Massie would never run for president. In fact, Thomas Massie would never run for a position that requires making influential decisions, because Massie could never run for such a position if he wishes to maintain his Puritan-Libertarian image 25,000 X users hold him in such high esteem for.
It is smart campaigning in the short term. Massie has gained the fealty of at least 25,000 people by swimming against the very tide—one of negotiations and compromises—that Congress has always moved with, and that the American people have always criticized. However, while it may look convenient from afar, Massie has configured himself into such a position that the “principles” his followers adore him for, are, at most loosely defined illusions of the congressman’s ideal utopia.
Principles are made to guide people through the noise of the world and keep them on the path they believe is right. It was Socrates' principles that led him to accept his death, as he knew that fighting for truth was more important than bowing to lies. It was the founding fathers’ principles that led them to realize the need for a new government, and drove their fight to do so. While there may be a gap between what is ideal and what is practical, principles are not created to exist purely in the mind. If one’s principles prevent him from gaining the very positions he requires to enact them, his principles are inherently flawed. It is Massie’s principles that advocate for the further restriction of presidential power, yet also a personal limitation to attain the position and restructure it in a way he believes to be fit.
This issue is not unique to Massie alone. This is the main reason why Libertarian principles have never been and will never be effective.
Michael Knowles explains this perfectly on his June 23rd show:
“Close your eyes and think of your favorite Libertarian politician… now name one concrete political achievement that person has ever done”
For decades, Libertarians have only stood against the positions of both Liberals and Conservatives. They have never had anything to stand for. If Libertarians had been anything more than Representatives and Senators throughout our history, The United States would cease to be a nation.
No Libertarian would ever use his power for anything meaningful, because it would compromise his most fundamental principle of using as little power as he possibly can. Because of this, today Libertarians, having never held the office of Speaker of the House or President, continue to criticize the sweeping actions and tough compromises that come with those positions.
Massie has also caught a medley of hate and honor in his vocal opposition to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which acts as the backbone of a large part of Trump’s budgetary and fiscal agenda. As he accuses it of disastrous spending, dangerous conduct around the debt, using biased figures to back himself up, I have one question I would ask him if I was ever to be in his presence:
What else, Mr. Massie?
Upon his request for enumeration, I would clarify:
“What else would you rather introduce to the floor that would altogether align with your “principles,” make sense in the real world, and be popular enough to pass?”
From what it looks like, the standard Libertarian Puritan principle would be to vanquish the national debt with a flick of a holly and phoenix-feather wand and single utterance of an Expelliarmus spell, or eliminate all forms of taxation and replace it with magically-appearing gold coins. Yet as far as I know, the American government does not work like that. Congressmen don’t fly to work in broomstick motorcades and participate in an annual Congressional Quidditch game every year. We live in real life, which requires real principles.
Principles are supposed to be practical. In the mid-century, when Communists threatened to occupy the highest places in Western society despite the relative unpopularity of their ideology, we did not call them principled. We called them stubborn, among much worse.
Communism does not serve the practical needs of practical people living in a practical world. It is no more than a vaguely defined illusion that exists in the minds of those keen to strip the world of its individuality, functionality, and beauty.
Many often wonder how to discern whether or not politics is a field befitting of their talents. Among innumerable physical, mental, and emotional indicators, I posit that the best way to explore this would be a self-evaluation of one’s principles. If he is often caught up in what he believes “could be,” and insists on rejecting what simply is, he is not fit for politics.
And so, Mr. Massie, a KY-04 primary loss may be exactly what you need to escape the Wizarding World and return to the real one.
Add comment
Comments