After setting loose a short rant against politicians earlier today… it’s time to mention another politician. Well, at least this guy is going to be better.

Rand Paul, son of Ron, is an interesting fellow. Like his father, he became a doctor. He now practices ophthalmology in Kentucky. Like his father, he became politically active. Rand is the founder and chairman of Kentucky Taxpayers United, an ideologically conservative organization.

Now, from my point of view, Rand is more “conservative” than truly “libertarian” on a few important issues. He’s even shied away from the use of the term. To me, it’s kind of unfortunate that he does not seem to carry his father’s passion for principle in the same way. On the other hand, he’s not shied away from telling the truth about American politics and history, some of which has proven to be unpopular yet he does it anyway. To that I say way to go! Ultimately, I’m willing to give him a chance. He’s clearly better than at least 534 of the 535 members of Congress, so I’d prefer to see him in the Senate than someone from the regular Republican goonsquad.

And what’s more, the Rand Paul campaign has agreed to do an interview for LCC here in the next couple of weeks, so I’ll be able to ask him some questions that still linger for me. This will be a great opportunity for YOU to ask some questions as well, so comment below if you want something specific addressed. I promise to take all reasonable questions into consideration.

The campaign is doing a moneybomb for the next two days, so if you are so inclined to support the Paul campaign then make sure to donate. Click on the picture below to go to the donation page.

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

Rand Paul Moneybomb August 19/20 and Interview Announcement

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: politicians, politics, republicans, Ron Paul, Tea Party

Related Content:

• Why does the Tea Party support Scott Brown? (20)
• Why Every President Sucked (5)
• The Dismal Year (2)
• Demonstration Report from UT-Austin on August 9, 2010 (9)
• Young Americans for Liberty launch new version of YALiberty.org (0)

In the world of literature on liberty, books fall into three distinct categories. First are the books for experts scholars, deeper works that address high level concepts, social or economic theory, and philosophical ideas. Next are the books for the informed reader, those that have a working knowledge of libertarian ideas and seek to improve one’s understanding of the philosophy of liberty. Finally, there are books for those just starting their journey in liberty, those who have little knowledge of economics or libertarian theory. Jason Rink’s Disciple of Liberty falls into the latter category, and it fills a particularly useful void in libertarian literature: an easily accessible explication of liberty to the Christian newcomer, from the Tea Party proponent to the disillusioned conservative or liberal.

Rink’s key point, made very early in the book, is that Christians do not need to wonder if it is appropriate or biblical to get involved in politics to defend liberty. On the contrary, it is good and right to become informed and take a stand for what is just, good, and right, we ought to get involved in some way. One cannot simply look at Romans 13 and say that “obeying the powers that be” is all we should do. For those “on the fence,” Rink says to get on board.

But Rink does not simply tell us “just do something, anything!” without a care for what we stand for. “Just get out and vote!” is not a compelling message at all. Rather, he takes the minarchist, constitutionalist position, and defends it wholeheartedly. Rink identifies seven priority areas to which Christians should pay special attention:

• Define the limits of authority – The government cannot, and should not, have unlimited power. Limits must be clear and precise.
• Demand fidelity to the Constitution – The limits of authority for the United States Federal Government are found in the Constitution, period. We should continually demand that representatives follow it.
• Defend liberty for all people – If we expect to have liberty, we need to defend liberty even for people with whom we disagree with their choices. This is a difficult, yet absolutely essential element part of our way of life. Rink quotes Thomas Paine:

“He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.”

• Despise debt – We know that individually we cannot spend more than we make; it is unsustainable and irresponsible. The same should be true of the government. No more can they be allowed to spend like a drunken sailor. And this isn’t even about welfare programs either, which account for a small fraction of total government spending. Rather, we must oppose spending on everything that is unconstitutional, from the FCC to the military-industrial complex.
• Demand honest money – The US Federal Reserve and it’s fiat monetary system is fraudulent, backed by nothing but empty promises. A return to the gold standard should be at the top of our priorities, for it is the ultimate check against runaway spending by the State.
• Desire peace with all nations – A Christian is called to love his enemies, not bomb them. We need to understand the history of our current wars in the Middle East and demand that the government cease interventionism.
• Disciple others in liberty – It is time to get involved in the fight for freedom, and we all can play an important role.

Disciple of Liberty has many commendable strengths. The book’s length, about 100 pages long plus reprints of the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, is very appropriate for a reader who is not ready to tackle a tome about libertarianism quite yet. It is fast paced and lively, yet gently brings the reader to see from a different point of view. The seven principles he outlines are really good, all are worth understanding in detail. Striking a balance between length and depth of material is quite a challenge. Overall, Jason Rink has put together an interesting and useful book that can help Christian newcomers to libertarian thinking grasp some fundamental ideas about liberty.

However, there are a few things in the book (or not in the book) that I don’t like. For one thing, the sources and bibliography are surprisingly short. A bit more along the lines of what to read next would have been nice. If I may be so bold, I’d recommend Rothbard’s For a New Liberty and Ron Paul’s Revolution: A Manifesto (which, I should note, was mentioned in the Bibliography).

Another minor point of contention I have with the book is its interpretation of Romans 13, but it is an admittedly debatable topic. Of course, Rink easily disproves the “you just have to obey the government” line that so many evangelicals take. He take’s Chuck Baldwin’s approach, which emphasizes that our contemporary “powers that be” are the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights, whereas my own approach is quite a bit different. Detailed exegesis, though, is difficult to distill when you are trying to reign in the length of a book, so it is understandable. But following on this point, overall I have certain doubts about making Constitutionalism our prime directive. Personally, I see the Constitution as a bludgeon or mirror, something we can use to say the Federal Government is so terrible that it does not even follow its own rules and never has. We need to remind people that government is aggression, and that our “resistance” against aggression is to expose such truth without apology. Now, Jason does mention each of these things in the book, so this is just the hard-core anarcho-capitalist in me talking. In no way am I downplaying Jason’s work.

As a personal friend of Jason now, I can honestly say that I am very proud of what he’s done despite my reservations on a few points. This is a great book for liberals, conservatives, or Tea Party supporters, who are all in need of some perspective about what liberty should mean to us. I think that it would be great to give to your Christian parents, relatives, or friends who are fed up with the Federal Government and are looking for an alternative. I encourage you to use Disciple of Liberty to strengthen your own resolve and plant new seeds of liberty in Christian hearts.

Visit Jason Rink at www.jasonrink.com. Buy his book here.

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

Disciple of Liberty by Jason Rink

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: christian libertarian, Christianity, conservatism, constitution, liberalism, libertarianism, Tea Party, theology, war

Related Content:

• New FAQ Questions Added (3)
• What Happened to the Southern Baptists? (5)
• The Proper Origin of Rights (44)
• Links for this Memorial Day (0)
• How Libertarian Are You? (2)

On February 18, 2010, Joe Stack set the final plan of his life in motion. At roughly 9:00 a.m., he burned his house down, traumatizing his wife and child. By 9:40 a.m., Stack had departed from the Georgetown airport 21 miles from his home in his Piper Cherokee PA 28 airplane. At 9:56 a.m., he crashed this plane into an IRS office near the intersection of Mopac Boulevard and U.S. Route 183 in Austin, Texas, ending his own life, killing one individual, seriously wounding others, and causing immeasurable grief to many more.

On behalf of the libertarian community in Austin, I want to offer our most sincere condolences and prayers for the victims and their families. Our hearts go out to you.

Joe Stack was a disturbed individual. His motivation for violence was outlined on his personal webpage, EmbeddedArt.com (the site has been temporarily taken offline, but you can see an archived page here). Apparently, he was angry at the government, and in particular at the Internal Revenue Service, for their part in causing his financial ruin. He wrote about his painful history of personal economic distress and how tax laws had left him with little to live on. He had been treated unfairly, just as any taxpayer has been. Nevertheless, though is anger was justifiable, his actions most certainly were not. It was not an act of self-defense, but rather distinctly criminal. In my opinion, he may have simply gone insane. Rational people do not believe that crashing a plane into a building will bring about deeply sought change.

For many Americans, this will confirm in their minds that people who hold anti-government ideas are altogether crazy and delusional. Let us as libertarians be perfectly clear: we do not condone aggression such as this whatsoever. Let us be the first to condemn this violent behavior. For that matter, let us be the first to condemn all institutionalized violence as well, for what else is the State but organized violence? Stack was just as much a victim of the evils of government as anyone, but this fact does not give him, nor anyone else, the right to kill others in response.

We have already begun to see comments after news articles decrying “tea party nutjobs” or even libertarians as a whole. Please, friends, do not think that Joe Stack’s actions are representative of true libertarians at all. We wish to be peaceful voices for peace. We do not believe our good ends – ending the coercive State – justify our means. More violence is not the answer.

Those of us who consider ourselves Christian libertarians will be even more quick to say that Stack’s actions were nothing short of evil. Let us recall Jesus and the tax collector Zacchaeus from Luke 19:1-10. Zacchaeus was likely a far more aggressive person (if our understanding of history is near accurate at all) than anyone in that building, and yet Jesus still entered his house and ate with him. Doing so put Jesus in a position of immense vulnerability to the violence of the state. Tax collectors in Jesus’ day had the power to destroy people outright. Yet Jesus was humble enough to show compassion to “tax collectors and sinners” and his very presence inspired a profound change of heart in Zacchaeus. Jesus even called Matthew, another tax collector, to be one of his twelve apostles (Matthew 9:9-13). We want to exhibit that same kind of compassion towards those who commit aggression against us.

And for any modern-day “tax collectors” reading this, consider the response of Zacchaeus and Matthew. Are you ready to abandon the use of force and follow Jesus?

Murray Rothbard says it eloquently: the State is “a bandit gang writ large.” As libertarians, we seek to end the institutionalized violence of the State. We envision a society characterized by voluntary interaction between individuals, where aggression being criminal and exceptional rather than commonplace and accepted. But, you may wonder, how can we possibly achieve such a society? How can we quell the cycle of violence?

Any lasting change requires changing ourselves first. Surely, more violence cannot be the means for resolving violence. We must refuse to condone this system that continually brings about strife. We do not need merely a new Congress or president, but a philosophical revolution brought about using the means of peace. Philosophical revolution brought forth at gunpoint is worth very little, but through persuasion and reason hearts and minds are transformed.

This is not an easy task; in fact we may never see the defeat of the State in our lifetimes. It is not as though we can fly a plane into the Death Star and end the Galactic Empire in one fell swoop. To truly defeat the State, we must see a drastic shift in public ideology and morality. Nothing else could possibly work! Those who love liberty have been on the losing side for thousands of years, and we will continue to lose until society abandons its love of institutional violence. Unlike Joe Stack, who said, “Violence not only is the answer, it is the only answer,” we know better. Violence is ultimately the greatest enemy, let us not take on the same characteristics of the State that we oppose so much.

May we never forget that we will accomplish our goals by being men and women of peace, not war.

(1) Special thanks to Anthony Gregory for helping me form these thoughts.

(2) Photo credit: Jay Janner of the Austin American Statesman.

Please feel free to comment and express your own condolences.

UPDATE: This article was featured on LewRockwell.com on February 22, 2010.

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

Joe Stack and the IRS: A Christian Libertarian Response

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: Austin, News, taxation, taxes, Tea Party, Texas, theft

Related Content:

• It’s Tax Day 2010, have you paid your fee to live? (3)
• Interfaith Leaders of Detroit learn to play Grand Theft Auto (6)
• Why does the Tea Party support Scott Brown? (20)
• Tax Slavery Sucks (3)
• Tax Humor (0)

Scott Brown may not be like all the other Democrats, but he’s just as socialist. So what if he doesn’t like ObamaCare? He continues to support MittCare in Massachusetts. He voted for it. According to Wes at THL, Mr. Brown simply thinks that the government could “do better” than ObamaCare, which should be read as “we need more MittCare – on a national level!” From a speech Brown gave today:

"I voted for health care here…. we’re past campaign mode and I think it’s important for everyone to get some form of health care. So to offer a basic plan for everyone I think is important… there are some very good things in the national health care plan that is being proposed"

Obama may not have his 60 votes in the Senate anymore, but it doesn’t really matter in the long run. More than likely, Brown will just assist getting a bill just as bad as ObamaCare, if not worse, passed.

Scott Brown clearly believes in continuing to use the Federal Government’s military might to invade, occupy and force sanctions upon other nations. OnTheIssues.org notes that he wants 30,000 more invaders to go to the Middle East, and that they need to stay until they “finish the job.”

Oh yeah, and he also believes that torture is ok.

Eric Fehrnstrom, Brown’s top strategist, told National Review, “but from our own internal polling, the more potent issue here in Massachusetts was terrorism and the treatment of enemy combatants.” Whether or not Fehrnstrom’s point is true (some have told me, and I believe them, that health care was the main issue), Brown is committed to “enhanced interrogation” as good and right – and so are plenty of other Massachusetts voters, apparently.

That the Tea Party Movement bought into this guy is ridiculous. It’s either a sign of weakness on their part or infiltration from the exact people they have been trying to replace – let’s hope it’s the former, and that the lesson is quickly learned. Tea Partiers know something is wrong, but they sometimes just don’t see the problem in context. I hope those of us who are consistent libertarians can take the opportunity to show them that the State is not the answer – it has never been the answer.

There is only one potentially decent thing to come out of this event: it sends some minor shockwaves through the establishment. But this is only a minor setback to the shadowy puppet masters. We should remember that the two-party system is just a one party system with twin faces. Fundamentally, they support the same policies and do the same things while duping the public into thinking that replacing the blokes every few years is going to make the difference. As historian Caroll Quigley notes in Tragedy and Hope, it most certainly won’t:

The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy.… Either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.

Let Scott Brown’s victory be a lesson to us all: We cannot count on the establishment to support freedom.

UPDATE: And for some more funky Tea Party news, check this blurb from Lew Rockwell.

UPDATE: The moment of truth…

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

Why does the Tea Party support Scott Brown?

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: elections, News, politicians, politics, Tea Party

Related Content:

• Rand Paul Moneybomb August 19/20 and Interview Announcement (0)
• Why Every President Sucked (5)
• The Dismal Year (2)
• Joe Stack and the IRS: A Christian Libertarian Response (11)
• Interfaith Leaders of Detroit learn to play Grand Theft Auto (6)