The Elfin Blog

The modern American political atmosphere, especially on the state and national levels, is dominated by a two-party system characterized by partisan bickering, watered-down policy, and legislative deadlocks, and there is usually very little anyone can do about it. Enter Jesse Ventura, the governor of Minnesota who recently completed his first year in office. Gov. Ventura also happens to be a former Navy SEAL, actor, and professional wrestler who, even after a year in office, can still attract media attention like a fish to water. One of the many things that makes Ventura so attractive to the press and the people is that, among many other things, he ran for governor under the banner of the Reform party, beating out two well established candidates from the Republican and Democratic parties. “A deeply polarizing figure” (Pattison, 1999), Ventura angers and perplexes politicians and pundits from both sides of the aisle, with his plain, often brash manner of speech, and extreme opinions. These facts make Jesse Ventura one of the most fascinating figures in American politics today, and perhaps the century. This paper, then, will discuss, and attempt to define, Jesse Ventura’s political ideology by examining his general outlook and specific positions on key issues, and then critique Ventura’s ideas from a more conservative ideological standpoint in an effort to demonstrate how one man can anger so many people.

Ventura’s Ideology

Jesse Ventura ran for governor of Minnesota on the Reform party’s ticket, a political party founded by Ross Perot. Of all the independent political parties, the Reform party seems to currently have the most clout and potential for being a real challenger to the traditional two-party system in this country, particularly in the upcoming presidential election (Bai, September 27, 1999). Governmental reform is the Reform party’s main ax to grind, hence the name, but it attracts a wide variety of real and potential candidates whose views vary just as widely. Ventura himself, Reform’s biggest winner to date, is at odds with Perot on a number of issues, and people have even urged him to seize control of the party (Bai, September 27, 1999). All of this in-fighting speaks to the fact that it is impossible to accurately pin down a person’s ideology by simply saying they are a member of the Reform party. Hence, further examination of Ventura’s political outlook, both in general and on specific issues, is necessary in order to define his political ideology.

General Outlook

Jesse Ventura’s political ideology is as complex as he is, but it could most easily be described as classically liberal, or even vaguely libertarian. He is economically conservative and socially liberal (Bai, October 11, 1999). He has a passion for self-reliance (Morrow, 1999) and small government (Pattison, 1999). He feels that government is involved in too many aspects of people’s lives (Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee, 1998). He does, however, believe that if the government is to be involved, it should be done with financial sense, and with as much citizen involvement as possible (Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee, 1998). Showing a touch of liberalism, Ventura believes that citizens should take responsibility for their own actions and that the role of government is to ensure that people are able to do that in a well-informed manner, with opportunity for all to succeed (Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee, 1998). Difficult though they are to define in a single word, Ventura’s beliefs do form an ideology and, for that matter, one with which many people seem to agree.

Terence Ball and Richard Dagger (1999) state that an ideology performs four functions for those who hold it: explanation, evaluation, orientation, and political action. Governor Ventura’s ideology, a combination of many different ideologies, provides these as well. The governor’s ideology serves as a way for he and his supporters to explain and evaluate the political world, as well as a way of approaching problems and deciding on which actions to take.

Jesse Ventura believes that a great many of the social and economic conditions and problems people live under are either the fault of government interference or of citizens not taking responsibility for their own actions. For example, he thinks that taxes are often too high, and that a new, simplified method of taxation would be more fair (Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee, 1998). Further, the governor feels that a great many problems Minnesota residents face, particularly in public education, are a result of parents not taking an active enough role in their children’s schooling. Ventura believes that the role of government should be to help people make good decisions, but not to raise people’s children for them (Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee, 1998). Ventura and his supporters explain and evaluate a great many social and economic problems from this standpoint.

Jesse Ventura’s ideology also serves as a base from which he and his administration make sense of the political arena and conditions around them and help them form a plan of action to deal with some of these problems. Governor Ventura, using his ideological beliefs as a guide, is able to decide which problems he feels are most important and need to be addressed first. For example, in his first year in office Ventura spearheaded a $1.3 billion tax rebate from a tax surplus the previous year, cut taxes for Minnesota residents, and increased education spending (Bai, October 11 and 25 1999). The ideological functions of orientation and political action were at work when the governor prioritized his goals, and mobilized his supporters for action. Although Jesse Ventura is most likely not thinking in these terms, his ideas do form a definable ideology that determines his general outlook as governs the state of Minnesota.

Two other factors that affect a person’s general outlook and help define their political ideology are their conceptions of human nature and freedom (Ball & Dagger, 1999). Jesse Ventura’s conception of human nature is essentially libertarian or classically liberal. Ventura, who encourages a free market economic system and minimal government involvement in economic matters, believes that people are competitive by nature. Progress is made when people compete for resources and acquisitions. Although he has never said this outright, his policy goals illustrate this kind of thinking, particularly in his desire to privatize certain services currently performed by the Minnesota state government, allowing private companies to compete with each other for business (Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee, 1998). Ventura himself, after being accused of being too obsessed with money said, “I’m a capitalist. I’ve been obsessed with earning a living and making a living my whole life.” (Pattison, 1999). Being a man who has lived his whole life engaged in some sort of competitive occupation, Ventura no doubt see this as human nature, and as such he feels people should be free to pursue, and compete for, their goals.

Jesse Ventura’s concept of freedom would also fall under the liberal viewpoint. Using the triadic model of freedom outlined by Ball and Dagger (1999), Ventura’s view of what freedom is can be clearly understood. The agent to be free in Ventura’s view is the individual, which is illustrated by his passion to himself and pursue his goals, and his love of self-reliance (Morrow, 1999). The goal, then, for any individual is to be free to pursue his or her own happiness, according to Ventura’s liberal take on freedom. The former wrestler, Navy SEAL, actor, and motorcycle gang member has certainly demonstrated his passion for pursuing his own idea of happiness. Finally, the main obstacle to individual freedom, Ventura would say, are unnecessary limitations on one’s ability to pursue their goals, such as governmental interference. Ventura’s position is that big, unwieldy government and not enough direct participation from citizens leads to unneeded governmental involvement in people’s lives (Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee, 1998). These ideas fall right in line with a classical liberal view of freedom.

So far this paper has painted a picture of Jesse Ventura’s general outlook by describing and defining his ideology. Using a definition of ideology put forth by Ball & Dagger (1999), Jesse Ventura’s views do fit the bill as an ideology. Further, Ventura’s concepts of human nature and freedom have been discussed, and it is clear that although his views in some areas may be unique, Ventura is essentially a classical liberal or a “progressive libertarian,” as he calls himself (Walsh, 1999). To get a clearer picture of Ventura’s outlook, though, it is useful to examine his specific positions on certain issues.

Specific Issues

Jesse Ventura can be accurately described as many things, but soft-spoken is not one of them. He has a reputation for speaking his mind about a great many topics, often without much evidence of forethought on his part. He does, however, have a plan for the state of Minnesota on a number of specific topics that he sees as important. The governor did run, after all, on the Reform party ticket, and reforms are what he has in mind. Ventura’s main goals now are downsizing government, tax reform, and improving public education (Bai, October 11, 1999).

One of Ventura’s most ambitious and personal goals is to downsize government in general, and specifically to transform Minnesota’s legislative branch into a unicameral legislature, which, Ventura argues, will be more responsive to the people and hold politicians more accountable for their votes (Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee, 1998). One of the governor’s main arguments since he entered the race or governor almost two years ago was that there was too much government in the lives of the people, and that it was not responsive to the needs of its citizens. Ventura also plans on exploring ways to have the private sector take over certain services now provided by the government which, he argues, will make them less costly to the taxpayer and more responsive to their needs (Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee, 1998). In this vein, Ventura also opposes a state or national health insurance system, primarily for the above reasons, and because people should be responsible for their own health, although he does want to find ways for the needy, and particularly children, to be guaranteed good, albeit cost effective health care (Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee, 1998). These policy goals demonstrate Ventura’s fiscal conservatism, as well as his emphasis on personal responsibility, particularly with regard to health care.

Another issue that Governor Ventura holds dear is tax reform. This again speaks to his position that government should be smaller and spend less. Already, as mentioned earlier, he has won a major $1.3 billion tax rebate for tax payers in Minnesota. He also has a large tax-cut and overhaul of property taxes planned (Bai, October 11, 1999). The minimal, simplified tax system he supports shows Ventura’s libertarian inclinations when it comes to taxes. Ventura does support a tax system based on consumption, as opposed to income, where higher sales taxes would be paid, but people would not pay tax on things such as interest earned on savings (Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee, 1998).

One issue where Ventura shows his liberal taste for ensuring equal opportunity for all is public education. Ventura, during his first year in office, has increased spending on schools and public education. His goal is to have a 17 to 1 student to teacher ratio in Minnesota’s public schools (Walsh, 1999). Always the penny pincher, Ventura has charged his state’s education experts with finding ways to best spend money to improve education, and to employ the most effective teaching practices (Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee, 1998). Jesse Ventura’s passion for improving Minnesota’s schools demonstrates his liberal view that one role that government should play is to ensure equality of opportunity through the best education possible, although what one does with that education is up to them.

Jesse Ventura would certainly agree that actions speak louder than words, and his are no exception. Ventura’s actions in office to date, as well as his plans for the future, demonstrate his complex ideology. Ventura is a governor who hates big, intrusive, expensive government, and yet is willing to spend tax dollars on things that are important for ensuring equality of opportunity, such as education. These tendencies fit with the description that he is economically conservative and socially liberal (Pattison, 1999). They demonstrate clearly what he perhaps cannot find the best words for: a description of his ideology. Certainly his desire for change is in a liberal vein, and he no doubt frightens conservatives to no end, despite their shared desire for less government, and lower taxes. Some would say Ventura is a walking contradiction, while others would say he is a politician for our times. Either way, he definitely has some very vocal supporters as well as critics with respect to his “progressive libertarian” ideology (Walsh, 1999). To further clarify Jesse Ventura’s ideas, and what it is about them that anger so many people, this paper will now offer a conservative critique of Ventura’s ideology.

A Conservative Critique

It probably would not be too much to say that Jesse Ventura is enough to give many conservatives a heart attack. Despite some similarities between Ventura’s ideology and conservatism in the areas of economics and smaller government, the rest of the two ideologies are at different ends of the spectrum. There are a large number of Americans who consider themselves conservative, certainly more than there are “Venturians,” so it is useful to compare the two ideologies to examine the differences between them. Ventura, who is basically at war with the religious right (Bai, September 27, 1999), has that faction of conservatives, as well as more mainstream conservatives to deal with. This comparison will make it clear why this is so.

The first obvious problem a conservative would have with Ventura is his desire for change, and relatively radical change at that. Conservatives, who tend to be satisfied with the status quo, have no desire to just change things because someone does not like it. Conservatives favor tradition, where Ventura is the antithesis of tradition. Even the name of Ventura’s party, Reform, is enough to make conservatives cringe. Conservatives favor only gradual, pragmatic change when necessary. To a conservative Ventura, who has plans for sweeping changes in government, including his beloved unicameral legislature, must seem like a bull running through the china room. A conservative would say that the institutions in place in Minnesota have worked well for quite some time, and that there is no need to tinker with them, let alone dissolving one entire house of the legislature. Ventura’s ideas will fail, a conservative would say, because his changes are neither necessary nor well thought-out.

Another major ideological problem conservatives would have with Ventura is his love of self-reliance. Although modern conservatives might actually agree with Ventura on this point, traditional conservatives do not believe people want or even are capable of self-reliance. Individuals cannot, according to conservative doctrine, exist outside of society. While Ventura certainly does not wish for people to exist without society, he does value individualism, as stated earlier, and many conservatives would say this undermines our social bonds with each other. Interestingly, Ventura shows his conservative side when it comes to his love of family. Ventura, like conservatives, believes in the importance of family. One of Ventura’s major touchstones in his arguments and policy statements is for parents to take responsibility for raising their children, and to get involved in their education. A conservative would agree with Ventura on this point, as conservatives see the family as the most basic social institution. Still, a conservative would say that one of the purposes of government is to restrain the passions of the individual and to provided guidance. Ventura, on the other hand, would argue that the individual should take responsibility for their own actions, and it is not the place of government to decide what is right or wrong for a single person.

Finally, while a modern conservative would agree with Ventura’s capitalist, free-market views, a traditional conservative would argue for a more “pragmatic” approach to the market. Too much free trade, a traditional conservative might argue, can weaken traditional relationships between people, such as family. While Ventura certainly is pragmatic in that he is willing to try what he thinks might work, his distaste for governmental intrusion is too great to prevent a free-market economy. Free trade is in line with Ventura’s individualistic, self-reliant view of the person making their own way in the world, and it is more cost-effective for the consumer, in Ventura’s view, to allow free competition between businesses. Ventura would see governmental regulation of the market as an intrusion on a person’s pursuit of happiness, although he would certainly favor some regulation to ensure equal opportunities for someone to begin new businesses. Ventura, in practice, will leave the economy pretty much alone in Minnesota, as it is essentially what he thinks it ought to be. While traditional conservatives might argue, most modern conservatives would agree.

This brief conservative critique of Jesse Ventura’s ideology has hopefully served to clarify Ventura’s positions on a few issues, as well as paint a better picture of his ideology in general. There are a great many conservative politicians who are watching Jesse Ventura very closely, because it seems as though his is the new face of reform in American politics. While Jesse Ventura will not seek national office any time soon (Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee, 1998), his popularity serves as a wake-up call for conservatives who may need to begin exploring a little sensible, pragmatic change now, before Ventura or the Reform party gain power in Washington and start turning things upside-down. Jesse Ventura would like nothing better.

Conclusion

This paper has identified and analyzed the political ideology of Jesse Ventura using the definition of an ideology put forth by Ball and Dagger (1999) as a guide, as well as described some of Ventura’s specific positions on some issues. Jesse Ventura’s ideology, though unique, can best be described as classically liberal, or as he calls it “progressively libertarian” (Walsh, 1999). Ventura is an economic conservative in many ways, but he also feels that there are some social programs that are very important, such as public education. Most importantly, Jesse Ventura is an individual, and that is something he values in himself and encourages in others. Ventura simply wants to make government smaller, and more responsive to the needs and wishes of the people it serves. Government, according to Ventura, should be by the people. In that vein he promotes not only individualism, but also individual responsibility for government and one’s own actions. To be sure, Jesse Ventura is very much an individual, and although many people may not like his policies, or what he has to say, he certainly gets people thinking, and that may just what Americans needed.

References

Bai, Matt. (1999, July 19). Jesse finds his big guy. Newsweek. p. 32.

Bai, Matt. (1999, September 27). The outlaws come to town. Newsweek. pp. 28-29.

Bai, Matt. (1999, October 11). Now he’s the man to see. Newsweek. pp. 36-38.

Bai, Matt. (1999, October 25). The taming of Jesse. Newsweek. p.38.

Ball, T. & Dagger R. (1999). Political ideologies and the democratic ideal. (3rd ed.). New York: Longman.

Jesse Ventura Volunteer Committee. (1998). Official site of the Jesse Ventura volunteer committee. http://www.jesseventura.org (1999, December 7).

Morrow, Lance. (1999, October 25). The brawlers. National Review. pp. 20-22.

Pattison, Kermit. (1999, March). Pinning Jesse down. George. pp. 92-95+

Walsh, Kenneth. (1998, December 28 & 1999, January 4). Jesse Ventura. US News & World Report. p. 69.

By Tom Kersey, 1999. You really read the whole thing, huh?