The following platform consists of my answers to the questionnaire circulated by University of New Hampshire students. Beneath that, you will find a more traditional platform that I wrote in 2017.
Candidate Mary Maxwell answers the UNH students' questions:
Born: 1947 in Boston, Massachusetts
Family: My paternal grandfather was a horse breaker in Ireland. In 1906 he worked for the Boston Fire Department by driving a team of horses. My maternal grandmother was a pianist who played "relevant background music" in cinemas to accompany silent films. My father was a Boston public school teacher and was fluent in Spanish and Portuguese.
I married a wonderful man in 1980; this caused me to move to his job location, Australia. I stayed there many years after he died in 2000. My overseas-ness has probably intensified my American-ness.
Education: My education comes mainly from library books and lately from the Internet. I have a BA from Emmanuel College, a Master of Liberal Arts from Johns Hopkins, a PhD in Politics from the University of Adelaide South Australia, and an LLB from Adelaide Law.
Experience: My main work experience is research and writing. When I see an intellectual problem that I want to solve, I get buried in the material until I feel that I understand what's going on. Then I share it by teaching, such as by writing books. I have published 14 books and about 450 articles. (I am old.)
Other (hobbies, interests, etc.)
Music, especially singing, plays a big role in my life. When my husband and I lived in the United Arab Emirates from 1988 to 1993, I was able to form a children's choir. Another hobby is microbiology, but I will need a second lifetime to develop it.
In Australia we had the case of a wrongly convicted man, Martin Bryant, but people refused to discuss it, so I made up a comedy show to handle it. Naturally, feeling that I was now in show biz, I got a swelled head and went on to produce a few plays. It's easier than you think.
Who is your personal hero and why?
We do not have enough heroes anymore, as it is not something one is encouraged to be. If heroism means fighting against a wrong, my friend Rachel Vaughan wins the prize for trying year after year to get police to arrest certain wicked people -- all to no avail, but that's beside the point.
If heroism means working a whole lifetime to invent a better way for mankind, even if only on paper, my hero is Philip Allott in England, author of Eutopia. How foolish that it's now considered "not fashionable" to envision better ways. (Really, we ought to be locked up, the whole bunch of us.)
What was your favorite subject in school and why?
Ahem. Whatever subject was being taught at the moment, I was onto something else. However, the school subjects for which I acknowledge great gratitude, ex post facto, are poetry and religion. (It was a "nuns" school, but I have come to appreciate many religions.)
What is your favorite book and why?
When I was 29, I discovered EO Wilson's book Sociobiology and it has continued to underwrite my view of human nature. At the moment, my favorite book is one that I myself wrote entitled Reunion: Judging the Family Court. (Sorry if that sounds boastful -- but you asked....) Meir Tamari's The Challenge of Wealth conveyed to me profound insight as to the economic needs of the community.
Several 2019 books -- quite a year! -- are fascinating me in regard to our scandalous "mass incarceration": Rachel Barkow's Prisoners of Politics (too right, mate!), Tom Mueller's jam-packed book Crisis of Conscience, that encourages whistleblowing (yay!), and Bryan Stevenson's Just Mercy that will teach you all you need to know about injustice, in one afternoon.
What is your favorite movie and why?
Lately I appreciate watching reruns of The Godfather (though I can't know for sure if it accurately portrays the mafia). If you asked me for my non-favorite movie that would be Patriot's Day, a horrendously wrong presentation of the event known as the Marathon Bombing.
Who is your favorite musician or type of music and why?
Opera -- for the emotion. Church music -- for the joy. Spanish guitar, because my husband George had such reverence for, say, Rodriguez. Across the street from my apartment in Concord, Arnie's Ice Cream shop plays Elvis-type stuff all day, loud. I can't get enough of it. Roberta Flack, oh my. Did you know that Estonia had a revolution based on everyone singing?
Simply teach the child how to think and reason, how to appreciate the great achievements of civilization, how to approach the mysteries of science. Then send him or her into the library and he will do the rest. Or if they want to use their hands, provide them with mentors for various skills. Make the kid responsible and hard working. My late husband, a physician, said the most important thing in his upbringing was that his father put him in charge of growing tomatoes (in a greenhouse, in Scotland) from age 8. The main gift of this was his sense that his contribution was needed by the family.
I mentioned Meir Tamari's The Challenge of Wealth. It is based on medieval rabbinic law -- decisions about business must be made with the whole community in mind. Our American ideology of "free enterprise" is not based on such reasoning -- it blesses the bottom line every time. That is just plain stupid.
In fact, it has contributed to what was mentioned above as the loss of interest in heroes. If your ability to make a zillion bucks is top priority, you will laugh at virtue and strength of character. Soon, character will not be idealized. Wow, have I seen this happen in my lifetime!
The most egregious example I can think of, of a corporation being focused on profit to the detriment of the whole planet, is the use of fracking in mining. "My rabbi" would say No way, Jose.
Another example of failure to consider the whole community's welfare occurred in 2005, just after Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana and Mississippi. Much reconstruction was needed, and locals geared up to get the contracts. But these went to Halliburton and a few other giants (without bids). How disgusting can you get? Our Constitution meticulously allocates power to government and citizens. We destroy that balance when we let billionaires be above the law. Here is a short, sweet law from 1890 that still exists on the books and should be enforced. It's the Sherman Anti-Trust Act:
"1: Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal.
"Section 2: Every person who shall monopolize, ... or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony."
In 1933, the US Supreme Court ruled clearly, in favor of the Sherman Antitrust Act, in Spectrum Sports v McQuillian: "The law directs itself not against conduct which is competitive, even severely so, but against conduct which unfairly tends to destroy competition itself."
My advice for today is to deal with the economy at state level, or lower. One good reason not to have an overall national policy is that if it's not too bright, everyone will suffer. To quote Mao Zedong (whom I certainly do not admire) "Let a thousand flowers bloom." In fact, let them compete for the most brilliant plan. Now that's free enterprise!
My PhD thesis is published in book form, with the title Morality among Nations. The theme is that there is no morality among nations and will never be any, as we are not built to care about far-away people. It's an impossible task. And we are not 7 billion individuals, we are societies.
Hence, as you can imagine, I do not approve of the thing that poses as International Law. That law has no enforcer. It confuses people into thinking some "good" is going to happen. Forget it! Isn't it hard enough for a country just to manage its own social relations?
Sorry to say, I do not see today's foreign leaders doing the right thing. I think each of them is being somehow forced to follow rules made up by Globalists. (Ditto our US leaders.) If they would all please abandon that strategy, we could perhaps have fruitful dialogue. In my Australian life I saw meaningless chit-chat by leaders of the G-20 nations. Pathetic. It would make you cry.
I'd be happy if America would admit to the bullying and pillaging it has done overseas. Everybody but us is already aware of it anyway. And acknowledging it would help us stop it. So, you ask me for my International Relations plan? Top priority: stop torturing, and stop wrecking cultures.
Well, I hate to be a spoilsport, but I think no nation can any longer construct a reliable defense. I think most of the hardware is a waste of money. Certainly there is no point making a plane that costs $40 million and is likely to get shot down. I mean come on.
There are ways to wipe out your enemies that don't involve bombs, such as by starving them. Everyone knows that the Saudi government has recently starved 17 million Yemenis. But few Americans know that we Americans have starved people by imposing "economic sanctions" -- ask the Iraqis, the Venezuelans, and now the Iranians. Does any of that help the United States?
You ask what my policy is on defense. I would be creative. The art of warfare is naturally creative. You do what you must. But you don't do what will risk destruction of your own nation (even spiritually). And you don't make war for the purpose of helping weapons manufacturers have fun, right?
The most important thing is to honor Article I, sec 8, clause 11 of the US Constitution, which allocates decision-making on war to the people (via your reps in Congress). It's not for a president or a Pentagon, much less a slippery entity such as NATO, to go around deciding on regime-change.
I sued President Trump in federal court for threatening to nuke North Korea. Was it really the Koreans that I cared about? Or was it the fact that reciprocating bombs from Korea or its allies might land on my head? Neither. It was because I am a stickler for the Constitution.
My policy on health care? Easy peasy -- I have no federal policy on health care. Today I heard Sen Warren say she is working toward a three-year nationalizing of "health care for all." Quel garbage. Look again at Article I, sec 8 of the Constitution. It lays out the 18 subjects for which the Founding Fathers granted legislating authority to Congress. Do you find health care there? No. Then it is the state's prerogative to deal with it.
I consider big health care a disaster. It changes doctors from independent practitioners to employees in "the health industry." You want your doctor to make decisions that help you, not help him, or help his (unnamed) bosses, right?
Please, just because you see something growing bigger and bigger -- like technology, or sports matches, or psychiatric medicine for children -- don't assume that a further march to bigness is inevitable. Talk about faulty thinking!
Dear Student, 'd like to ask, at this point, if you can guess what I will put forward as my policy on immigration. Have you been getting a whiff of my general approach to political issues? Am I likely to say "Open the US Southern border?" Or am I likely to say "Be stingy?" And please think about what position you take on Dreamers, separation of parents from kids, etc.
I mentioned my horse-breaker Grandpa. He came in at Ellis Island, pre-1914 when there were no passports. Your ancestors too, unless you are Native American, had the privilege of landing. Does that mean you should share it with all refugees?
I discourage any such sentimental answer. Each question can be handled separately. I say the Dreamers have to be given US citizenship. They came here pre-age 4, and know no other home. Did Mom and Dad cheat their way in? Maybe not; maybe we cheated them in. Rep Henry B Gonzales, an immigrant from Mexico, and a brilliant Congressman, opined in the 1980s that we should not grant any more work visas to Mexicans because we treat them so badly!
Frankly, even if the Dreamers' Mom and Dad did cheat, a 3-year-old year can not be held responsible. For Pete's sake, just legalize those kids. And what about the separating of kids from their families while in detention? There I think "arrest and criminal charge" might be appropriate. Not arrest of the families but of the US officials or politicians who are doing it. There is no excuse -- each of those children will have permanent damage from this traumatic experience. Shame, shame, shame.
However, my overall immigration proposal is stingy. When I was an exchange student at a German law school, I had to report to Mannheim police if I even switched to a different room in the dorm. They saw me as a visitor and if I didn't obey I would get kicked out. I felt that was completely proper -- the host country has to satisfy its own needs.
My main reason for a tight immigration policy is that a nation needs integrity of its culture and its laws. If hordes of strangers come marching through, the domestic population will stop obeying the law. There will be moral chaos.
Ah, but isn't there a humane urge to help a refugee? Recall my dismissiveness toward "international law." I prefer the US not sign a treaty to guarantee foreigners a right of asylum. Rather, we can maintain the freedom to consider the merits of any particular episode of refugeeism. Note also, how it is sometimes our foreign incursion that created the flow of refugees.
Sacrifices will need to be made by all people. We have ridden roughshod over the earth, reducing biodiversity and polluting even the vast Pacific Ocean with non-biodegradable plastic. Look at the way Monsanto's pesticides poison the vegetation that ends up in the food supply. The environment can't fix itself up. Bad news: we cannot continue to have all the luxuries we now have. Careless water usage will have to be curtailed. And not in such a way that only the rich get to drink water!
My policy on guns? It does not matter what I want. The Bill of Rights is not negotiable. It says, in the second amendment, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Undoubtedly the authors of the Bill of Rights knew what they were doing! When they said the "security of a free state" they meant security as against an outside invader or an inside tyrant.
Anyway, if you wish to change the gun law, you must get 38 states to agree on a constitutional amendment. (Note: I strongly suspect that the spree of spree-killings has been secretly arranged to happen, and is neither a spontaneous outburst of "hate" nor a copycat phenomenon. That needs to be dealt with first.)
I don't give a hoot about gender equality (except I think maybe males have become unequal; they are certainly having their masculinity attacked). I give a massive hoot about 5G technology, surveillance, facial recognition, medical experimentation on prisoners, child trafficking, and mandatory vaccination.
I would impeach the whole US Supreme Court for treason in regard to the Albert Florence case, which allows strip searches galore. (What could they have been thinking? No more Bill of Rights?) I am ready to do more than impeach many members of "DoJ" -- they need to be behind bars. Their crimes are legion. To obstruct justice is a federal crime listed in the US Code. Ah, justice -- an incredible blessing! Kindly see my book Prosecution for Treason.
Statement to NH Students about the importance of voting and being civically engaged
A 24-year-old girl, sitting next to me on the Concord Coach bus last night (November 19, 2019) , asked me why I am running for office. I said "because of ... um... the situation." She said "Yes, I understand."
Frightening isn't it? I mean the situation, and the fact that we don't have words for it. So, having been asked in this Student Survey, to talk about the importance of voting, my statement is not "Get out there and register to vote at age 18." It is "Get out there and run for office"
You need only be 18 for various state positions, 25 for member of Congress, and 35 for president. Don't be fazed by lack of experience. If you have a brain and a heart, well, what more than that does any leader have? Trust me, you are needed.
Students of New Hampshire, I am dying to answer more questions, so please invite me to your local meeting place and we can conquer the world over a bag of potato chips.
Mary Maxwell's more traditional Republican platform, dated 2017
In 2017, when Mary was still in Australia, she heard that US Senator Jeff Sessions got appointed Attorney General of the United States. A special election was held in Alabama to fill the vacant senate seat. She popped across the ocean to participate as a Republican candidate. Although she lost the nomination to Judge Roy Moore, she had a ball campaigning. Her website, maxwellforsenate.com, contains the following platform:
I declare my candidacy for US Senate -- Mary Maxwell.
Here is, roughly, what I stand for:
I stand for the rule of law.
I stand for strict adherence to our wonderful – almost miraculous -- Constitution.
I stand for states rights, extremely. Police powers are state, not federal. And so is education.
I stand for the environment, that is, the biosphere, God’s creation, without which we cannot live.
I stand for the Sherman Anti-Trust act, and its power to curtail the huge corporations, including media corporations.
I stand for citizen-run (not prosecutor-run) grand juries.
I’m all the way with the right to marry and the right to carry.
I’d propose loyalty oaths that would prevent members of secret societies from running government.
What do I stand against?
I stand against war. Period. Or “regime change,” as in Libya.
I hate invasion of privacy.
I will oppose mandatory vaccinations with my life.
I will seek indictments re medical experimentation on soldiers.
I stand against cruelty in prisons, and privatizing the prisons.
I stand against the judiciary protecting various criminals, including pedophile rings. (Do I really have to say that?)
What could I do for America if I were in the Senate?
I would maintain the federal Constitution.
What could I do for Alabama if I were in the Senate?
I would maintain the federal Constitution.
My first priority would be to work with like-minded senators on the three areas in which I see an all-out deviation from the Constitution:
First, since war is imminent, I would insist that there be no war making apart from what was allowed by James Madison and colleagues in 1787, in Article I, Section 8.
Second, I would do what the House has just done – demand an audit of the Fed. Of course that would be only a step toward the necessary repeal of the outrageously unconstitutional Federal Reserve Act of 1913.
Third, I would look into government bullying. We can’t have government bullying us; it’s unheard of.
And what is this thing called Homeland Security? Does the homeland get more secure by banning protests? Oh Lord, what a thought.
What do I lack ability for?
I am not up on Glass Stegall. Being age 70 it’s unlikely my brain will develop a new talent for understanding investment banking -- and no doubt many other things.
Speaking of being age 70, the person that Alabama should be sending to the Senate should be more like 40. A 40-year old has 50 years ahead of him/her to put up with the decisions that are made.
I’m also not going to be dealing with – not for lack of competence but as a matter of principle – anything to do with culture wars. What principle is that, Mary? Two principles: First, I refuse to fall for the trick by which the media sets the political agenda by providing us with little enmities that will take our eyes off the really vital issues.
Second, unless I am mistaken, Congress has no way to enact legislation on these cultural matters. It will be enough for me to fight for the things I already mentioned.
And now to Mary. Where the Sam Hill did she come from?
Is she a carpetbagger? Technically, yes. I flew in from the other side of the planet. I was born in Massachusetts -- grew up there, then lived in several other states: Maryland, Michigan, New Hampshire, and New York. Then met George, an Australian, and followed him Down Under in 1980.
My only connection to Alabama (so far) is that Mom and Dad lived in Montgomery during the war, as Dad was in the Army Air Corps. Also I feel connected to Birmingham, intellectually, as the conservationist EO Wilson from that city has been my mentor for many years.
Since 2000 I have been a widow. I made one try at Congress in 2006 and was not planning to do it again. It’s only two weeks ago that I learned there was to be a special Senate election here. I thought, Gee, Rand Paul is not the only person who knows how to filibuster – I could do it, too.
If you will but give me the chance.