Missouri GOP Calls for Revolution notes that "Missouri’s Lafayette County Republican Central Committee has put up a billboard proudly advising citizens to prepare for the violent overthrow of the US government." The billboard (see right) reads:
A citizens guide to REVOLUTION of a corrupt government.
1. Starve the Beast, keep your money.
2. Vote out incumbents.
3. If steps 1 & 2 fail?
PREPARE FOR WAR - LIVE FREE OR DIE
Now, I'm not an admirer of electoral politics, political parties, or Republicans, but this ain't bad. But of course, this doesn't sit well with some regime libertarians--or should I say, regime "libertarians." In response to the billboard, one of them made his disapproval clear, in one of most disgusting "libertarian" posts I've ever read. Excerpts below, with some bolding added:
As someone strongly opposed to the Obama Administration's policies, I am finding myself embarrassed time and time again by its opponents--Republicans, libertarians, and other. There are some very good and on-target spokesmen for principles of limited government and individual freedom, but they seem to get little attention; instead we seem to be deluged with superficial, ignorant spokesmen who don't even mouth clever soundbites, or hysterical loonies weeping and drawing absurd conspiracy theories on blackboards. All of that is sad enough, and then we get this. This not so subtle piece of work is brought to us by a county Republican party. Not an isolated bunch of kooks, but a bunch of kooks with the official Republican Party name, suggesting violent overthrow of the duly constituted, democratically elected, government of the United States.
This will not do. I believe strongly in the right of revolution and I believe strongly that much of what the federal government does today is unconstitutional and immoral. But Barack Obama is my president, and this government is my government, whatever its very serious flaws. This remains a great, free, strong nation that can, as she has in the past, restore herself to her principles by free democratic and constitutional action. She is a free and great and noble country [note the equation of country and government here — SK] and my loyalty to her Constitution does not rise and fall based simply on who wins elections. ...
There are all sorts of reasons to criticize Obama. But the opposition must be based on serious ideas, responsibly advanced--not this demagoguery and childishness
As my friend Rob Wicks said, "I wonder if he thinks that black South Carolinians in 1840 should have said, 'John C. Calhoun is my senator.'" It is not "my" or "his" government. It is a criminal organization. When will statist-libertarians get it? Do they have to believe everything they learned from Saturday Morning public service commercials?
Update: A selection of comments sent in to me:
I agree, irredeemably awful.
Anyway, doesn't he like the American Revolution? Why was it okay for them to fight a war over far less? Because "the Union" is sacred, I guess.
This is bad. And what principles is he talking about returning to, anyway? I get sick of this bullsh*t American mythologizing about returning to anything. No, at best, he may be talking about living up to the rhetoric more fully. But as far as I am concerned, American domestic freedom probably peaked in the late 1960s and early 1970s.
Look at even the 50 states. This is a domestic empire. Almost all of it is conquered land, be it from Native Americans, Hawaiians, or Southerners. All this bleating about the empire being at odds with American tradition is mythological bullsh*t. The difference now is that the government no longer looks to exterminate or subjugate the natives and put Americans in charge of the local governments. They'd rather have proxies. I fail to see why empire by proxy represents some fundamental shift from the old fashioned kind
Why is this libertarian? with or without scare quotes. "Barack Obama is my president, and this government is my government, whatever its very serious flaws... restore herself to her principles by free democratic and constitutional action. She is a free and great and noble country and my loyalty to her Constitution..." LOL! How can you stand to read this stuff? I'm not kidding around. This is bad for your mind, man.
MY PRESIDENT?!?!?!? so he loves democracy, accepts the social contract and acquiesces in it all.
The only authority we are allowed to question is that of the past, and especially those who were on the losing side of struggles for freedom. Therefore, the American Revolution was good, but the Southern Secession bad, Vietnam war protesters are good, but the WWII objectors were bad, Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rosa Parks were good, but modern day civil disobediencers and tax evaders are bad, etc.
I'll take King George over Obama any day. Does this clown really think people were less free in 1776?
What's odd is that he takes particular offense at the fact that this message came from a county GOP. That would be like saying, "Not only does this piece of literature attack government spending -- it's coming from the Nazi party of all places, and they should be held to a higher standard."
How about Hitler as "My chancellor?" His appointment was all legal, as far as I know. (Godwin's law strikes again!)
Wow... let's forget for a moment that "limited government" is impossible. For this idiot to say "I believe strongly in the right of Revolution.....", and then write this drivel, calling himself a Libertarian.....is the epitome of ignorance.
Good job. We need to expose more of these morons for what they are: shills for the regime.
I damn near puked when I read that cr*p about Obama being "my President" and our government "flawed though it may be" is "my government". Second, I was really baffled to learn that the sign came from state Republicans. What is going on??? GOP sounding like libertarians and libertarians sounding like GOP??? I would like to think the sign represents some deep, principled devotion to personal liberty by this particular faction of the GOP and not simply an opportunistic play for the minds of genuine libertarian thinking types now that there is so much dissatisfaction with the current administration. The sign would be just as apropos with respect to the last administration and for many of those before even that. Somehow, I find it hard to believe the state GOP would have erected such a sign were Dubya still in office. I would like to think so, but I doubt it.
"But Barack Obama is my president,..."
Actually he isn't; he's the president of the states, that's why there is no requirement that he be popularly elected. John C. Calhoun was the representative of South Carolina, not the people of SC since the state legislature elected senators before the system was wrecked. Blind loyalty to an office is foolishness in any event.
Update 2: Our regime "libertarian" pens a risible retort to this post:
Stephan Kinsella adds a new one to the Lew Rockwell Vituperation Watch! Evidently, condemning fanatics who irresponsibly encourage violence and civil war and throw around ridiculous charges of fascism and whatnot qualifies as "one of most disgusting 'libertarian' things I’ve ever read."
It wasn't the condemning of "fanatics," it was the fawning, brainwashed Schoolhouse Rock adulation of the State. And if it's "irresponsible" to encourage violent defense of one's life (and not civil war, by the way, but REVOLUTION--those who hate the state's oppression of liberty just want to be free), then I suppose our centralist Lincoln idolator would have to condemn the American Revolution. How irresponsible they were!
You can always count on Kinsella (who has never in his life done a single thing to make a single person freer) for thoughtfulness.
I think in this post our RL is referring to the fact that he helps defend individuals from the state's victimization as an activist attorney. I of course admire and respect such activism, even if it can tempt the advocates into believing the pro-state, centralist norms they have to accept in order to make arguments to the state's "judges." In fact in a recent brief, he along with others advocates an extreme centralist interpretation of the Constitution that would give even more power and jurisdiction to the criminal gang known as the federal judiciary, to dominate the states, further eroding one of the few somewhat meaningful limits on central, federal power--federalism. (Criticism of libertarian centralism may be found in Rand, Objectivism, and One-World Government, Libertarian Centralists, and other posts.) I think our RL is trying to snipe at me for not being a lawyer who works for IJ or something. What is the relevance of this silly charge? To activists, there is no value to libertarian theory. Who did Murray Rothbard ever help to make any given person free? What a loser he was!