Mises Caucus Takes Over the Libertarian Party

This looks like an interesting story going into the mid-term elections.

As the Republican party continues to deny the Big Truth (Trump did not win the 2020 election) and pretend the January 6 insurrection was a picnic, many conservative and moderate minded people will look for a third party. While many voted for Joe Biden, there is discontent with Biden and the Dems which may lead people to consider the Libertarians. For their part, there is lots of energy in that camp.

In their party convention held in Reno, NV recently, party offices were swept by members of the Mises Caucus. This group is led by Libertarians influenced by Murray Rothbard, Tom Woods, and of course, Ludwig von Mises, and seems to incorporate a more socially conservative element. For instance, the pro-choice plank was removed from the Libertarian platform as was the following language opposing bigotry:

We condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant.

It is hard to say if this will make any difference in 2022 voting behavior. It could hurt Republicans by giving socially conservative voters a place to go besides the delusional GOP. It might hurt Democrats by taking away a few socially liberal voters into a party historically known for personal freedom and self-ownership.

In any case, I may be giving this issue more than a passing glance. There are some links with past work I have done. The Mises Caucus considers Ron Paul an elder statesment, if not a living saint. Ron Paul had a run for president a decade ago. At that time, he had some problematic endorsements of the theocratic variety. I noted the endorsement of Philip Kayser, who thought death a good end for gays, divorcees, etc., which didn’t help matters for Dr. Paul.

Will Paul rise again? Will there be a Libertarian strain of Christian Nationalism which will again rise up and influence the Christian right? The strange bedfellows may rise to sleep again.

Articles on the Mises Caucus

The Nation

Salon

Mises Caucus

Here is a great video summary of recent events.

Another Ron Paul endorser cites the death penalty for homosexuality

Today on Ron Paul’s website, an article by pastor Voddie Baucham is touted on the front page. The article titled, “Baptist Pastor Explains ‘Why Ron Paul?,'” provides reasons why Rev. Baucham believes Ron Paul should be elected. Clearly, the Paul campaign believes this is an important endorsement (as they did the endorsement of Phil Kayser).

Baucham is often cited on theonomy websites (e.g., American Vision and Theonomy Resources). Baucham is a proponent of removing all children from the public schools and an opponent of having age based youth groups.

In a 2009 blog post, Baucham wrote critically of President Obama’s June, 2009 proclamation of LGBT Pride Month, saying:

Hence, sodomites, who who are in large part responsible for the introduction and spread of the HIV/AIDS epidemic are praised for responding to this plague in an attempt to avoid annihilation (by the way, I know you don’t have to engage in sodomy to get HIV, but that doesn’t change the facts… see  the book, And the Band Played On for an honest look at this issue).  This is revisionism at its worst.

The President goes on to celebrate the fact that this abomination (Lev 18:22) worthy of the death penalty (Lev 20:13) is now being celebrated in the open.  He writes,  “Due in no small part to the determination and dedication of the LGBT rights movement, more LGBT Americans are living their lives openly today than ever before.” This is a clear sign of the devolution of culture.  As Paul writes in Romans, “Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.” (Rom 1:32 ESV)

Although Baucham writes “this abomination (Lev 18:22) worthy of the death penalty” and follows it with his view of Romans 1, he does not directly call for the death penalty now.  However, he does believe that the authority of civil government comes from God and that the church should inform civil leaders of biblical law. Baucham, like many Reconstructionists, believes that Ron Paul has a biblical view of jurisdiction. In his statement, Baucham says that Paul supports state’s rights and believes in limiting Federal power.

Additional information: In this sermon, Baucham refers again to the Leviticus and Romans passages which he interprets as calls for the death penalty. At the same time, he says gays should not be bashed. The inconsistency is not addressed.

Related:

 

Another Pastor Problem for Ron Paul? UPDATED

First read this:

Ron Paul Receives Major Evangelical Endorsement from Dr. James Linzey, President of Military Bible Association

Then, read this:

James F. Linzey Espouses anti-Semitic, White Racialist Conspiracy Theory

Then, check out the reaction at the Daily Paul:

Amazing evangelical endorsement from the president and founder of the Military Bible Association!

Paul’s supporters, for the most part, like the endorsement.

Nothing yet from the Paul campaign. I wrote Dr. Linzey to ask whether or not the Paul camp intends to promote the endorsement, with no answer as yet.

UPDATE:

Dr. Linzey today urges all military personnel in South Carolina to support Paul.

The Daily Beast examines Ron Paul’s Reconstructionist roots

Last week, I reported that Ron Paul hired Mike Heath (is he still AFTAH board chair?), and that Ron Paul touted an endorsement from an Omaha pastor who wants to implement Mosaic law, complete with executions for gays, adulterers and delinquent children.

Today, the Daily Beast’s Michelle Goldberg examines the topic and notes that many evangelicals who are coming Paul’s way today in Iowa lean toward the Reconstructionist side of the evangelical world.  The other interesting aspect of her article is the brief examination of the difference between dispensational and covenant theologies. The covenant folks believe that the Church is a replacement of sorts for Israel and that the Church will bring back the Kingdom of God on Earth. Dispensationalists believe that God will keep his promises to Israel and will remove the Church from the Earth during the “rapture” thus setting the stage for the coming Kingdom of God.

Often dispensationalists think political action is pointless since the world is coming to a bad end. Covenant adherents, among which are Reconstructionists, think that political takeover is necessary. One can see how the New Apostolic Reformation can work with the Christian Reconstructionists. However, as I pointed out last week, they part company over political ends. Reconstructionists favor a decentralized central government which would allow them to set up enclaves where Christian law dominates. New Apostolic Reformationists (e.g., Lou Engle, Peter Wagner, Cindy Jacobs) want the law at the Federal level to reflect Christian teaching in order to offset the judgment of God on the nation.

Does it seem odd and perhaps disconcerting that one must understand the nuances of Christian eschatology in order to understand what is happening in the GOP race for the nomination? Some reporters, like Goldberg, Pema Levy and Benjy Sarlin at TPM are getting it. I know Sarah Posner with Religion Dispatches is in Iowa today and she gets it. The gentlemen over at Right Wing Watch get it.

Do evangelical writers get it? Gentle reader, please enlighten me if I have missed it, but I cannot recall an evangelical writer or news source examining end times theology (and all it involves) as an influence on political theory.

Related:

Anti-gay politics and Ron Paul: A match made in Iowa

While Ron Paul’s personal beliefs about gays are hard to discern, his strategy in Iowa has been to make the most of anti-gay sentiment there. All last week, I pointed out the work of Mike Heath, Paul’s Iowa state director, to bring in Christian conservatives to the Paul fold. On Friday, I interviewed Brian Nolder, a pastor serving in Pella, IA who has endorsed Paul. Nolder noted that the Paul support among Christians has grown this election season but remains sharply divided between Christians looking for a candidate who will implement conservative positions on social issues from Washington and those who seek a weaker Federal government which will leave those decisions with the states.

With fine reporting, Talking Points Memo picked up on my posts last week about the Kayser endorsement and Mike Heath’s work there. This morning, TPM’s Benjy Sarlin explores Ron Paul’s support among Christian conservatives in Iowa. As I did last week, Sarlin found Christians there divided between those who want a perfect ideological candidate and those who want the Federal government to leave matters to the states.

Sarlin also highlights the work of Mike Heath who is selling Ron Paul as a conservative on gay marriage and abortion. The pro-life argument seems easier, but when it comes to gays, Heath has had a harder sell. In Iowa, Heath has worked to make Paul appealing to both ideological purists and state’s rights conservatives. In his TPM article, Sarlin points to Paul’s Defense of Marriage poster at events (see here) and various pastoral endorsements mentioning Paul’s opposition to gay marriage.

If anti-gay politics and Ron Paul have married in Iowa, then the matchmaker is clearly Heath. TPM reports that Heath had a “stint” as chair of the three-man board of the Americans for Truth About Homosexuality but that barely scratches the surface. While in Maine, Heath said it would be “prudent to reinstate Maine’s anti-sodomy law…” and called homosexuality “a sickness.” Heath opposed basic protections for gays including equal access in housing and employment.

Despite these appeals in Iowa to state’s rights, the prospects are slim that a Paul Presidency would rollback Federal civil rights protections very much. However, if Ron Paul is somehow successful and secures the nomination and then Presidency, he will have to fill an administration with people who think like him. One way to evaluate who a candidate would bring into his administration is to examine his campaign.

Do I need to say more?

Related: