Kevin Craig for Congress

Friday, November 02, 2012

Christian Hypocrisy and RomneyLogic

The Top Billion Reasons To Not Vote for Mitt Romney:
Bob Enyart interviews pro-life activist Will Duffy on the top billion reasons to not vote for Mitt Romney.

Click here to listen to Part 1 - Show notes here.

Click here to listen to Part 2 - Show notes here.

Thursday, November 01, 2012

www.examiner.com interview

http://www.examiner.com/article/kevin-craig-libertarian-for-congress-missouri-s-7th-congressional-district

Go there and leave a comment.

Links omitted:

On not imposing my will on others by force, see:

http://IAmNotAnARCHIST.us

On why the government prohibits Christians from taking the oath to "support the Constitution," see:

http://KevinCraig.us/nolawyer.htm

Not omitted, but more information on why the federal government prohibits local schools from teaching students that the Declaration of Independence is really true, see:

http://KevinCraig.us/schools.htm

On the Supreme Court's "Endorsement Test," see:

http://KevinCraig.us/EndTheWall/endorse.htm

Conservatives Can't Vote for Romney

“Why NO True Libertarian, NO True Ron Paul Supporter, NO True Tea Partier Will Even Consider Voting For Big Government Mitt Romney for President”

True Libertarians, True Ron Paul Supporters, True Tea Partiers:

Vote AGAINST Higher Federal Tax Collections
Vote AGAINST Higher Federal Spending
Vote AGAINST Higher Federal Debt

We ALWAYS Vote AGAINST Candidates Who:

Vote FOR Higher Federal Tax Collections
Vote FOR Higher Federal Spending
Vote FOR Higher Federal Debt

Look at the Mitt Romney / Paul Ryan Republican Budget Numbers Below.

Then Vote AGAINST the Anti-Libertarian, Anti-Ron Paul, Anti-Tea Party Republican Presidential Ticket on Election Day.

Romney/Ryan Republican Federal Budget Plan Boosts Tax Collections 88%, Hikes Federal Spending 35%, and ADDS $4 Trillion to the National Debt

Here are Paul Ryan's own hard numbers on his budget plan (S1)

http://budget.house.gov/uploadedfiles/summary_tables.pdf

Paul Ryan's "Path to Prosperity" Budget Plan:

Increases Federal Government Tax Collections from $2.444 Trillion to $4.601 Trillion. A $2.157 Federal Tax Collection Increase. An 88% Tax Collection Increase.
Increases Federal Government Spending from $3.624 Trillion to $4.888 Trillion. A $1.264 Trillion Increase in Federal Government Spending. A 35% Increase.
ADDS $4 Trillion to the National Debt.

Libertarian Presidential Candidate, 2-Term Governor Gary Johnson, has pledged to cut spending 43% to balance the federal budget his first year in office.

Source: Press Release from lp.org

Not to mention the fact that Romney is pro-homosexual, pro-abortion, and pro-war.
What exactly are conservatives who vote for Romney trying to conserve?

Sunday, October 28, 2012

BB's Conservative Wisdom Endorses Kevin Craig

BBCW Endorses Kevin Craig for Congress in Missouri 7

Monday, October 22, 2012

Re-Legalize Heroin for Children

Recently added to my webpage on The War on Drugs:
Click to hear audio message: "Why it should be legal for a 10-year old to buy heroin, meth, and crack."
(And why you're not: • a real conservative
• a real American
• a real Christian
• an admirable human being
if you disagree.)

The War on Drugs is Not Conservative: • Why Don't Conservatives Oppose the War on Drugs?
The War on Drugs is Not Constitutional: • The War on Drugs is Completely Unconstitutional; • The Other Unconstitutional War; • The War on Private Property
The War on Drugs is Not Christian: • Should Christians Support the War on Drugs?; • Drug Evil

Monday, October 15, 2012

Latest Earned Media

KOLR10 News in Springfield interviewed me last week, and gave me 2 minutes for my answer to the question, "Why should SW Missouri voters vote for you?" Here's the answer from all three candidates:

Candidates for Missouri's 7th District Make Their Pitches to Voters

I don't know when the interview will be broadcast. It should be 5-10 minutes long.

Springfield talk radio host Nick Reed didn't like my pitch; or at least the first 10 seconds:

What message are Libertarians sending - www.ksgf.com

My feeling is he just needs to say something controversial-sounding to keep ratings up. By far the biggest argument I get is "You can't win; why should I waste my vote?" Libertarians always get this. Even from Republicans who have otherwise become slightly converted to the libertarian position on the issues. I think my answer was as persuasive as I can get in two minutes, and certainly had more passion than the other two candidates.

In this Congressional District, for a Libertarian to say, "Hey voters! We really can WIN this one!" is the mark of mental illness. Here are some numbers. My strategy is not to pretend. Absent some extraordinary scandal involving the Republican, or a Las Vegas casino owner backing a Libertarian with a million dollars, the Republican candidate does not even have to debate his opponents.

And probably won't.

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Murder the Iranian People!

If our gutless leaders don't nuke these people "back to the stone age," they are surely unAmerican and unpatriotic, are they not?

If they won't use nukes, the least they could do is put down a few hundred thousand children with stiff sanctions.

end sarcasm

I thought this documentary was definitely worth an hour of my time.

I'm not sure what happened to the video in an older post, "Images of Iran," so this post supplements that one.

My memory never serves me well, but apparently, as I review that earlier post, back in 2008 there was talk about how close Iran was to having a nuclear weapon, and threats were being made against Iran. Threats which always seem to fall on the people rather than their "rulers."

End the War on Drugs

Unlike the last three Presidents of the United States, I've never used drugs. Never even been in possession of any.

I've never been persuaded (and nobody's ever tried to persuade me) that drugs would help me serve the Lord Jesus Christ better.

The Bible says human beings were created to "exercise dominion over the earth." It has always seemed to me that drugs were designed to evade dominion.
The Fourth Commandment says: "Remember the Sabbath-day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work...." Will drugs help me "remember," or are they designed to help one forget? Will drugs help me do all my work? Or are they designed to replace work.
The Fifth Commandment is, “Honour thy father and thy mother." Will I be able to express honor to my parents if I'm intoxicated? Will they be impressed to see me on drugs? Will they feel honored?
The Sixth Commandment is, “Thou shalt not kill.” If I'm stoned will I be able to write a coherent letter to President Obama explaining why I'm Sick of Sanctions and urging him not to kill more people in Iran?
The woman next door wants to kill her baby. Can I give her the moral and emotional support she needs if I'm hallucinating?
I have 19 homeless people living in my home. I'm trying to help them get a job and save up first- and last-month's rent on a place of their own. Shall we all do drugs?
The Seventh Commandment is, "Thou shalt not commit adultery." The duties required by the Seventh Commandment include:
- chastity in body, mind, affections, words, and behavior; and the preservation of it in ourselves and others; watchfulness over the eyes and all the senses; temperance, keeping of chaste company, modesty in apparel; marriage by those that have not the gift of continency, conjugal love, and cohabitation; diligent labor in our callings; shunning all occasions of uncleanness, and resisting temptations thereunto.
Solomon wrote parts of the Book of Proverbs:
- To deliver you from the immoral woman, From the seductress who flatters with her words, {17} Who forsakes the companion of her youth, And forgets the covenant of her God. {18} For her house leads down to death, And her paths to the dead; {19} None who go to her return, Nor do they regain the paths of life; {20} So you may walk in the way of goodness, And keep to the paths of righteousness. Proverbs 2:16-20
Will I be more chaste, more faithful, more righteous, if I'm under the influence of drugs?
The Eighth Commandment is "Thou shalt not steal." The duties required in the eighth commandment are,
- truth, faithfulness, and justice in contracts and commerce between man and man; rendering to everyone his due; restitution of goods unlawfully detained from the right owners thereof; giving and lending freely, according to our abilities, and the necessities of others; moderation of our judgments, wills, and affections concerning worldly goods; a provident care and study to get, keep, use, and dispose these things which are necessary and convenient for the sustentation of our nature, and suitable to our condition; a lawful calling, and diligence in it; frugality; avoiding unnecessary lawsuits and suretyship, or other like engagements; and an endeavor, by all just and lawful means, to procure, preserve, and further the wealth and outward estate of others, as well as our own.
Will I be able to do these things, and be a leader in my community to promote these things, if I'm on drugs?
The Ninth Commandment is, Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
- Zechariah 8:16 - These are the things that ye shall do; Speak ye every man the truth to his neighbour; execute the judgment of truth and peace in your gates:
- Proverbs 31:8-9 - Open thy mouth for the dumb in the cause of all such as are appointed to destruction. {9} Open thy mouth, judge righteously, and plead the cause of the poor and needy.
- Luke 19:8 - And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.
Do drugs make me more Accurate, keen, discerning, and able to speak the truth?
Do drugs help me become more Accomplished?
Do drugs increase my Alertness?
Do drugs help me cultivate empowering Aspirations?
Does using drugs make me more Available to help others?
Do drugs make me more Charitable?
Does intoxication make me more Compassionate?
Do drugs help me keep my Composure?
Do drugs help my Concentration?
Do drugs increase my Confidence?
Do drugs make me more Contented?
Do drugs make me more Cooperative?
Do drugs help me Counsel others?
Do drugs give me realistic Courage? (not hallucinating courage which is non-rational and unrealistic)
Do drugs help me achieve greater levels of Courtesy and good Manners?
Do drugs help me become more decisive?
Do drugs help me achieve develop deference toward others, and to become less selfish?
Will doing drugs make me more dependable?
Do drugs make me more determined?
Will drugs give me more diligence?
Do drugs give me more discernment?
Do drugs enhance my self-discipline?
Will using drugs reward me with greater discretion?
Will drugs make me more earnest?
Will drug use make me more efficient?
Will using drugs increase my endurance?
Will drugs give me more energy and enthusiasm?
Will drugs make me more faithful?
Will using drugs give me additional foresight?
Will drug use help me be more forgiving?
Do drugs give me the frugality that my grandparents would have admired?
Will drugs make me more generous?
Will remarkable gentleness be the fruit of drugs?
Will my children want to follow my model of gratefulness when I'm intoxicated?
Do drugs increase honesty? Honestly?
Do drugs give users more hope?
Do drug users show more hospitality (dealers excluded)?
Does drug use make me more industrious?
Will I have more initiative as the result of drugs?
Will I show more interest in people after drugs have their effect?
Will drugs give me lasting joy?
Will drugs make me a son of Abraham:
"For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the LORD, to do righteousness and justice; that the LORD may bring upon Abraham that which he has spoken of him.
Is greater kindness the result of intoxication?
Given that Love means obeying all of God's commandments (Romans 13:8-10), will drug use empower me to love my neighbor?
Will drug use make me more loyal?

Perhaps my doctor will say the answer to some of these questions is "Yes." Perhaps my priest, counselor, court-appointed psychiatrist, professional life coach, or spouse will say the answer to some of these questions is "Yes." Perhaps we might all agree that a judicious use of marijuana, LSD, or opiates might be beneficial.

But should this man be the one making that decision for me?

Congressman Billy Long

Making this decision -- and putting me in prison for 20 years if I disagree with his diagnosis -- is not one of the powers enumerated in the Constitution as being one he may exercise.

Perhaps in another post I will ask questions M-Z

Saturday, August 18, 2012

$222 Trillion Controlled Demolition

People sometimes ask me why I'm running for political office when I am not an archist. The reason is simple: I do not believe in violent revolution.

If Samuel Adams -- "Father of the American Revolution" -- were to travel through time and view Washington D.C. today, he would take up arms. Or he would be tempted to, until he came into contact with the U.S. Federal Government's SWAT teams, predator drones, and nukes.

Violent revolution is not only unChristian, but hopeless.

Adams would have to satisfy himself with urging Americans to repeal the Constitution and abolish the government Adams himself helped create.

But the only way Americans can follow the wise advice of Sam Adams would be to elect those who share Adams' vision, and are willing to carry out the mandate of the People and the Declaration of Independence.

I share Adams' vision. I am ready to keep the promises made (and broken) by the Republican Party, and start abolishing. And keep going down that path.

If we don't begin immediately to dismantle the Leviathan in Washington D.C., and do it "decently and in order," the federal Leviathan will self-destruct in chaotic and unpredictable ways, and trigger global economic meltdown, chaos and riots by people who have become dependent -- economically and psychologically -- on the Messianic State, and possibly leave us with a dystopian "warlord society." The German hyperinflation of the 1920's led to Adolph Hitler.

It's a truly horrifying prospect, which Congress refuses to deal with, because they only have to worry about buying more votes during the twenty-two months before the next election.

I have been shocked to learn about the depth of federal indebtedness. I first blogged about it in 2007 when it was estimated at 60 trillion dollars, then followed up in 2010 when it was recalculated at $202 trillion.

The latest figure is $222 trillion.

Professor Kotlikoff observes, "Governments, like households, can’t indefinitely spend beyond their means. America’s children, whose futures are being rapidly destroyed, are smart enough to tell us this."

Congressmen who care more about their own election than the inevitable economic dislocation, pain, and widespread social chaos that will be caused by today's deficit spending fit the definition of a "sociopath."

Repudiating the National Debt.mp3 - Murray N. Rothbard

Friday, July 27, 2012

Chick-Fil-A and Homosexual Fascism

You've probably heard of the "Chick-Fil-A" controversy by now.

It's another example of what I call "homosexual fascism."

My friend Mark McCulley has reminded me that in Query XVII of Notes on the State of Virginia, Thomas Jefferson said government should not get involved in these issues of conscience:

The rights of conscience we never submitted, we could not submit. We are answerable for them to our God. The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. [Or no homosexual "marriage."] It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. ... Reason and free enquiry are the only effectual agents against error.

Those who speak most loudly in favor of "tolerance" seem to be the most intolerant.

Monday, July 16, 2012

Obama: Government, Not Business, Deserves the Credit

Remarks by the President at a Campaign Event in Roanoke, Virginia are already appearing on Facebook.

Judge Andrew Napolitano adds,

The president explains his beliefs:

"There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires."

There is a true premise to this argument, even though the conclusion (government deserves the credit) is false and evil.

Leonard Read pointed out over half a century ago that there isn't a single person on the face of the earth who knows how to make a pencil.

From scratch.

Mining the elements, lumberjacking, creating the paint, building the trucks and trains, and repairing the pencil-making machines. No one person can do it all.

The process of manufacturing anything depends on a global network of commerce and trade involving the Knowledge And Decisions of millions -- no, billions -- of human beings, operating under a division of labor, and overseen by the "invisible hand" of Divine Providence. Knowledge changes a billion times a day, with the changing prices of everything on earth, signaling the relative scarcity or abundance of natural resources and human labor. Every business that makes a decision based on this ever-changing knowledge changes everything for those who depend on the productivity of that business.

There is a difference between the "individualist" and the "survivalist." Obama doesn't understand the distinction.

True and Godly "individualists" cooperate with others, but they don't use the State to impose their will on others by force. They are not "isolationists." Individualist business owners are so grateful for the help they receive from an infinite chain of suppliers that they voluntarily pay them all out of their own pocket. They are happy to admit the truth of Obama's claim: "If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help...."

The question is, who organized the help?

Obama wants to give credit to the government. But the government had nothing positive to do with the manufacture of pencils, refrigerators, computers, and iPhones. Billions of people worked harmoniously, helping other businesses by doing business with other businesses, bringing the products to consumers around the world.

Who decided who would do what? Who decided how much help would be provided? Who made these decisions? Based on what knowledge?

Obama doesn't understand the answers to these questions, because he's a socialist.

Too many Americans are also socialists.

If we lived in the Soviet Union under totalitarian communism, and the Government Ministry of Shoes provided shoes to all the Soviet serfs, Obama -- and way too many Americans -- would be appalled at the very idea that the manufacture and distribution of shoes should be left to the "anarchy" of a "free market." They would ask these questions:

How could you? You are opposed to the public—and to poor people—wearing shoes! And who would supply shoes to the public if the government got out of the business? Tell us that! Be constructive! It's easy to be negative and smart-alecky about government; but tell us
• who would supply shoes?
• Which people?
• How many shoe stores would be available in each city and town?
• How would the shoe firms be capitalized?
• How many brands would there be?
• What material would they use? What material lasts?
• What would be the pricing arrangements for shoes?
• Wouldn't regulation of the shoe industry be needed to see to it that the product is sound?
• And who would supply the poor with shoes? Suppose a poor person didn't have the money to buy a pair?

Obama doesn't know how these decisions are made by a global network of free trade. So he concludes that government central planners should do it all.

And he thinks they have!

Economist Murray Rothbard should have been in Roanoke to make this point to President Obama:

These questions, ridiculous as they seem to be (and are) with regard to the shoe business, are just as absurd when applied to the libertarian who advocates a free market in fire, police, postal service, or any other government operation. The point is that
the advocate of a free market in anything cannot provide a "constructive" blueprint of such a market in advance.
The essence and the glory of the free market is that individual firms and businesses, competing on the market, provide an ever-changing orchestration of efficient and progressive goods and services: continually improving products and markets, advancing technology, cutting costs, and meeting changing consumer demands as swiftly and as efficiently as possible. The libertarian economist can try to offer a few guidelines on how markets might develop where they are now prevented or restricted from developing; but he can do little more than point the way toward freedom, to call for government to get out of the way of the productive and ever-inventive energies of the public as expressed in voluntary market activity. No one can predict the number of firms, the size of each firm, the pricing policies, etc., of any future market in any service or commodity. We just know—by economic theory and by historical insight—that such a free market will do the job infinitely better than the compulsory monopoly of bureaucratic government.
"How will the poor pay for defense, fire protection, postal service, etc.," can basically be answered by the counter-question: how do the poor pay for anything they now obtain on the market? The difference is that we know that the free private market will supply these goods and services
• far more cheaply,
• in greater abundance,
• and of far higher quality
than monopoly government does today. Everyone in society would benefit, and especially the poor. And we also know that the mammoth tax burden to finance these and other activities would be lifted from the shoulders of everyone in society, including the poor.

Obama goes way too far when he says, "If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen."

All of us who own or work in businesses made these things happen, not the government. And we are grateful to Divine Providence, not the messianic state, for our daily bread -- and the ovens that baked it.

Monday, July 09, 2012

Am I a "Christian Reconstructionist?"

Yesterday Gary DeMar published an article entitled, "If You Love Liberty You Might be a Terrorist."

The article concerns a report on terrorism in the United States published by the Department of Homeland Security.

I'm not going to quote from the article. It's a short article, a good article, and you should click that link above and read the article.

The report on terrorism cites "Christian Reconstructionists and Islamists" as potential terrorists.

Gary DeMar is listed in the Christian Reconstructionism Category on Wikipedia, so he is rightly concerned about the government saying Christian Reconstructionists are potential "terrorists."

Although I claim in many places (here, for example) to be a Christian Reconstructionist, or to have a "background" in the Christian Reconstructionist movement, or that I wrote a regular column in the Chalcedon Report, some would say I am not a "Christian Reconstructionist" because I was "excommunicated" from the Christian Reconstructionist movement, both formally and informally, and am now listed in Gary North's "Who's Not" of the Christian Reconstruction movement.

But it seems that Gary DeMar still feels that I'm a "Reconstructionist." In the article above he wrote:

As one Reconstructionist put it: “Our goal is persuasion, not revolution.”

Although nearly every Reconstructionist has said something like this, the only Reconstructionist I know who has written those exact words (and Google hasn't disproven me) is a certain Libertarian candidate for Congress, in a blog post on Romans 13.

It's nice to feel "included."

On persuasion, see:

Persuasion, Not Coercion

On revolution, see:

Would Jesus Celebrate Independence Day?

Wednesday, July 04, 2012

Independence Day?

Wednesday, July 4, 2012

What a glorious morning for America!

— Samuel Adams, Upon hearing the gunfire at Lexington [April 19, 1775]

Today I'll be reading some essays suggested by the Future of Freedom Foundation, found below. I'll be asking these questions: Doesn't the Declaration of Independence say we have a "duty" to abolish any government that becomes a "tyranny?" And if America's Founding Fathers concluded that the British government in 1776 qualified as a "tyranny," wouldn't the Bush-Obama regime be a mega-tyranny? Don't we have a duty to abolish the current government if we aspire to be true Americans?

Hornberger’s Blog
Richman’s Blog
Bovard’s Blog

Immigration Project
Spreading the Word
Freedom Biographies
FFF Merchandise

INDEPENDENCE DAY

The Real Meaning of the Fourth of July by Jacob G. Hornberger Future of Freedom Foundation What Do We Celebrate on the Fourth of July? (2007) by Tibor R. Machan Future of Freedom Foundation Recapturing the Spirit of Independence (2007) by Ron Paul LewRockwell.com The Essence of Americanism (1961) by Leonard E. Read Foundation for Economic Education Adam Smith: 1776-1976 (1979) by Benjamin A. Rogge Liberty Fund

INDEPENDENCE DAY

The Founders' Rights Stuff by Rosa Brooks Common Dreams July 4th in Bizarro World by Manuel Lora LewRockwell.com A Declaration of Independence Against Big Government by Richard M. Ebeling Northwood University Three Cheers for July 2 by Andrew Trees Washington Post Celebrating the Fight for Freedom on the Fourth by Ron Paul RonPaul.com

FFF Email Update

Our hard-hitting, no-holds-barred free FFF Email Update is sent to subscribers daily and includes commentaries on current events, a thought for the week, most recent additions to our web site, and an update of upcoming FFF events.

Subscribe to FFF Email Update

If you are interested in making a donation by check to The Future of Freedom Foundation, our address is:

The Future of Freedom Foundation
11350 Random Hills Road
Suite 800
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
Tel: (703) 934-6101 Fax: (703) 352-8678

Sunday, July 01, 2012

In Praise of American Hypocrisy

This week 300 million Americans will at least be dimly aware that there is some kind of holiday. People get off work, there are parades, picnics, trips to the beach, Bar-B-Ques, and fireworks.

"Must be something going on here."

One survey a few years ago suggested that tens of millions of Americans believe that on "Independence Day" we celebrate the freeing of the slaves.

Probably more than that number of Americans know that on the 4th of July we commemorate the Declaration of Independence.

A much small number will actually read or reflect in any serious way on the meaning of that document.

And only a handful of "fringe," "wacko" "nutcases" actually believe that the propositions in the Declaration of Independence are actually true.

For this reason, our Federal guardians have wisely prohibited our local Public School teachers from teaching students that the Declaration of Independence is actually true.

Of course, Public School students can be taught that a bunch of dead white males used to believe that the Declaration was actually true.

They can even be taught that the Founding Fathers didn't really believe it was true, but merely promoted the Document in order to prop up their businesses and protect their ownership of slaves.

But Public School students can not be taught that the propositions in the Declaration of Independence are objectively true -- regardless of whether any person or government believes them to be true.

In other words, public schools teach the Declaration of Independence as history, as a relic, but not as enduring truth.

And beyond that, public schools inculcate tyranny rather than liberty as found in the Declaration.

So the 4th of July, like Christmas, is an exercise in national hypocrisy.

But that's a good thing.

Our nation is a little bit better because of vague myths like "Independence," "created equal," and "Christmas." Better than the government-coerced celebration of a mass murderer like Stalin or Mao.

This relates to our discussion yesterday about the danger of "warlords" emerging out of a libertarian society.

The transition from our current fascism into a libertarian society will only come with a revival of the influence of Christian principles.

When we arrive at a mature Christian/libertarian nation, there will obviously be a strong grassroots predisposition against aggression, coercion, and the whole "warlord lifestyle."

But there's always a critic of the libertarian vision who will say that if we get rid of too much fascism and socialism, a "warlord society" will emerge.

The Bible paints a different picture.

In the Old Covenant, if you came into contact with death and uncleanness, you yourself became unclean. But in the New Covenant, when the unclean comes in contact with the Christian, power flows out from Christ and the unclean becomes clean.

In subtle ways that might escape the observations and statistical calculations of the sociologist, ordinary people influence others when they make decisions based on Christian principles.

It's important to remember that a "warlord society" is a collective machine, not an individual "warlord." Hitler did not kill 6 million Jews; millions of Germans put on the German uniform and killed the Jews.

If there is sufficient opposition to coercion and aggression that our society should move from fascism to libertarianism, it will be because there are numerous individuals having a decentralized, grassroots influence on others. In such an environment, where does the "warlord society" come from? Who will wear the uniforms of the warlord?

In fact, however, even a superficial libertarianism, like a superficial Christianity, tends to intimidate warlords. Culture is powerful. Those who have a genetic, personality, or education-induced inclination to act like a warlord find themselves confronted with powerful moral influences in a Christian-libertarian society and instead of letting out their warlord tendencies, they pretend to be Christian-libertarians. ( <-- That's an important link. Read the verses. The verses are talking largely about warlords. ) Only when large numbers of the members of society reject libertarianism and begin manifesting warlord tendencies in their families, businesses, media, and voluntary associations, does a "warlord society" emerge in practice.

In other words, a "warlord society" emerges on the way down from Christian libertarianism, not on the way up beyond Christian libertarianism. If we are becoming more libertarian and Christian, the danger of a warlord society is not on our path; it's behind us.

Even Hypocrisy keeps us from the pure warlord society.

It would be better, of course, for people to be sincerely converted to Christian liberty. It would be better for America if we actually knew what the Declaration of Independence really said and took risks to defend those propositions:

That there really is a God, and His existence is a "self-evident truth"
That our rights really are the product of the intelligent design of our Creator
(not a gift from the government)
That all Americans really are obligated to conform their lives to
"the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God"
That one day our actions really must pass judgment with
"the Supreme Judge of the world"
That all Americans should have "a firm reliance on
the Protection of Divine Providence."
That Americans have a duty -- not just a right
-- to abolish any government
that becomes a tyranny.

Most Americans do not believe in America's Birth Certificate.

But at least they like to think they do.

And they want others to think that they do.