Docket No. 1776, U.S. Federal Government v. Augustus Sol Invictus

augustus-sol-invictus

Augustus Invictus is an outspoken lover of liberty. He is an enemy of the Left. He is an enemy of the War on Drugs and the War on Terror. Thankfully, he is running for the US Senate in Florida. The following article is meant to communicate the ideas of Augustus Invictus, and to justify these viewpoints and show why Floridians have to elect Augustus Invictus. Much of the information in this article comes from Augustus Invictus’s campaign website. A vote for Invictus is a vote for freedom.
On his website, Invictus has released a “Declaration of the Failings of Federal Government.” This is composed of a list of fifty-five grievances directed against the United States Federal Government. I encourage you to read the entire list here: http://www.invictusforsenate.com/political/indictments.html. In the following, I shall list and explain certain grievances that I see as controversial in the libertarian community. A few that really stuck out to me include:

2. It has allowed Money to usurp the role of Law.
The regulation of political contributions is a rather grey area for the Libertarian Society. On one hand, it is political expression and ought not to be regulated. On the other hand, excessive contributions lead to corporatism and new regulations that do nothing more than hurt the individual and the small businesses. As soon as the Citizens United decision was released, the Left proclaimed the end of progress and how the free market unencumbered and deregulation would ensue. This sounds like heaven to us, but did that really happen? Since the Citizens United decision, Obamacare is still in effect, inflation still persists, deficit spending has expanded more than ever, the cost of business regulations has increased from costing we the tax-payers $1.75 trillion per year in 2010 to more than $2 trillion dollars in 2016. We can see that the Federal Register is over 80,000 pages. Citizens United helped the left and the corporatists, not the free market. When one is paying politicians, this individual has the ability to make their decisions that will ultimately affect your freedom. If we, the libertarians, want to make progress, we must get money out of politics and end the federal bureaucracy. Some may ask, “how can a libertarian accept regulation, especially regulation of expression?” The answer is simple. The state is nothing more than a mafia. It is a corrupt business that is funded by coercion of the common man. From this, we can conclude that whereas it is a business, corrupt nonetheless, the state has the right to refuse donations and “gifts” and not allow their workers to accept these contributions as well. When a man with an agenda buys a politician, he imposes his will on you. Contributions are not free expression, they are means by which a private citizen can convince the state to dominate that citizen’s neighbors.

7. It has allowed the electoral systems to become governed by money & special interests, rather than by the will of the electorate. Candidates are no longer men chosen to represent the community: they are products to be marketed.
The FEC is a private corporation that runs how we are able to be involved in the political process (I will not go into detail as to why libertarians should get involved in politics for that dictates an article of its own. James Chillemi does a fine job explaining the necessity of libertarian political engagement in the following article: http://libertyhangout.org/2016/02/5-reasons-why-libertarian-anarchists-should-vote-for-austin-petersen/ Remember though, it was Murray Rothbard that said libertarians can vote in self defense). This organization has suppressed the Libertarian Party since it began. It even silenced liberty Republicans like Ron and Rand Paul during their presidential bids. The FEC must be abolished and the people must take control of our elections so that liberty may stand a chance.

8. It has allowed unrestrained immigration for three generations, to the great detriment of the American people & of the land. Our forefathers came as conquerors: the immigrants of today come as parasites.
I hate to break it to you, but an open borders approach is deadly to Western Civilization. In our current welfare state, we simply cannot have open borders. We can see that among the general public, 48% of people in the US want smaller government while 41% want bigger government. Among foreign-born Hispanics in the US, 12% want smaller government while 81% want bigger government. We are not going to make government smaller by allowing mass immigration. What happens if the population of Brazil moves to China and the population of China moves to Brazil? Culturally speaking, Brazil becomes China and China becomes Brazil. The United States is one of the champions of Western Civilization and Western Civilization is the only civilization that promotes upward mobility, cultural libertarianism, respect for women, rights for the minority, intellectual progress, individual choice, and holds a relative degree of High Trust. One does not end the state by allowing masses of those dedicated against the West into our civilization, one ends the state by creating a moral society of High Trust in which the demand for government diminishes into oblivion.

This is a point that so few libertarians realize, and it’s time libertarians do their research on what happens when open borders and a welfare state is mixed. We must first focus on ending the welfare state and the state itself before we focus on opening our borders. In choosing a society, the law of supply and demand applies as well. We ought to create a libertarian society and THEN open the borders. A society predicated upon the restriction of travel via legitimate property rights rather than illegitimate state control. They that desire a libertarian society shall come. Leftists would choose societies with welfare states as they do now. And to those who say one cannot be libertarian and against open borders: “Meanwhile, while our troops are trying to police the border between Syria and Iraq, our own borders remain as porous as ever. Terrorists who entered our country could easily do so again through our largely un-patrolled borders.” This was a statement from Ron Paul — the reason I, and many of us here, are libertarians.

40. It has sought to annihilate the rights of the States by diminishing what were once sovereign entities until they might become mere administrative districts.
Here at Liberty Hangout, we are Anarcho-Capitalists, we are Voluntaryists. How could we endorse a proponent of states rights? One is able to use states rights to diminish the power of the federal government, the greatest enemy to the American people and the world. Through devolution to the states, new alternative policies may be tested to demonstrate the successes of a free market economy. The states are much more likely to elect libertarians as well. It is very difficult for a member of a minor party to be elected to federal office. As of now, however, there are 145 elected Libertarians. At a local, and now federal, level, libertarianism is rapidly expanding.

9. It has allowed the face of the earth to be desecrated with pollutants & artificialities, with plastics & asphalt, with strip malls & parking lots. No Government in history has profited so greatly from such reckless irresponsibility.
16. It has plundered our seas by handing them to corporations; ravaged our Coasts with pollution; plagued our towns with regulations paid for by special interests; and destroyed the lives of our people.
22. It has allowed so-called development upon the earth such that the Wilderness hardly exists any longer. Where National Parks have been created, there have roads been paved for the admission of thousands of tourists. Where no law preserves the land, the forests merely await the coming urban sprawl.
26. It has allowed & encouraged the destruction of wildlife habitats in favor of this ever-teeming, ever-expanding population of Untouchable Americans, providing federal funding for the “development” of the land and the raising of apartment complexes, shopping malls, and fast food restaurants.
From Invictus’s website: “Economic freedom does not necessitate the destruction of the environment. America can be productive & powerful without polluting the air, water, and soil. The freedom of Americans to pursue their business interests should not mean that we can no longer drink our own water. And where urban sprawl may threaten our American Wilderness, there we must decide which we cherish more: strip malls or our children’s heritage.” Invictus is right. We cannot destroy our world for the advancement of consumerism in our right minds. If we irreparably destroy our air, soil, or water, we all go out of business. We need to realize that libertarians can be, and should be, environmentally conscious. Destroying the environment would be unacceptable in a libertarian society. Damaging the environment makes the world a less pleasing place. The damage done can shorten our lifespans, destroy undiscovered cures, disrupt the food web, and ultimately eliminate human life. In many ways, and under a broader interpretation, damaging the environment without repairing the damage is a clear violation of the NAP. Go ahead and destroy your soil or water.

But if you impede upon the property rights of others by means of making the common natural resources unusable, you have violated the human experience. In causing a decline of the condition of the world’s natural resources, you impede on the rights of other people to use these resources. In fact, it makes economic sense to preserve the environment. As a businessman that relies on natural resources, the businessman would likely keep their resources in the best possible condition so that they may increase sales and optimize profit. Now, I am not saying we need the backbone of the state to coerce environmentalism. As I said, it makes economic sense for businesses to uphold their natural integrity. In addition, we as consumers have the power of the boycott. Why not purchase environmentally friendly resources? Also, is it really so bad to say the state should cease funding businesses, especially those that hurt the world, by means of corporate welfare? For more information on our current crisis, I would highly suggest reading The Diversity of Life by Edward O. Griffin. And for more information on how libertarians can help preserve the environment, I would recommend Free Market Environmentalism For The Next Generation by Terry Anderson and Donald Leal. Both are splendid writers.

One can see that Invictus has a great idea of what is wrong with this nation, but what are his actual views? As one could guess, he is a follower of the libertarian train of though of personal and economic freedom. To start, Invictus is an enemy of the War on Drugs. In fact, the War on Drugs caused the family of Invictus to close their pharmacy. This incident led to great economic strife for his family. Invictus is a victim of the vile wrath of the state, he has experienced first-hand what atrocities may be committed by the Great Fiction. Augustus Invictus also connects the War on Drugs to the militarization of police.
Invictus is a non-interventionist as well. He has seen that our current foreign policy has cost us “American lives, countless trillions of dollars, and untold embarrassment.” This statement is undeniable. Our foreign wars are among the greatest burdens on the American people and are the greatest threats to freedom in the modern day.
Invictus follows the path of Ron Paul with regards to money.

He is in favor of the abolition of the Federal Reserve, repeal the income tax, end the IRS, and cut our spending and regulations. In the senate, Invictus would lead the fight for a balanced budget.
Invictus encompasses the libertarian state of mind when it comes to civil liberties:
Whether an American marries a member of the same sex or of the opposite sex is not the concern of the Government. Whether an American speaks with his wife or his mistress is not the concern of the NSA. Whether an American consumes alcohol or marijuana is not the concern of the DEA. Whether an American owns one firearm or three is not the concern of the ATF. We must restore our civil liberties and limit the power of the Government to interfere with the private affairs of our citizens.

All these truths are self-evident. Invictus wants to break down the institutions that destroy our liberty the most. It is about time that we elect people that will fight and make legitimate progress to a libertarian society.
Invictus believes in devolving education from the federal government to the states. He is an enemy of Common Core and No Child Left Behind. He believes that our current education system harms both our intelligent and our struggling students. Many libertarians, as am I, are against public education entirely, but one thing to consider is the fact that the states have a greater capability to experiment at their level than the federal government. Perhaps one state will privatize education outright and we shall see the benefits of them doing so throughout the nation when the other forty-nine states witness the benefits of private schooling.
As stated above, Invictus is for preserving the environment. I shall not reiterate the libertarian case for environmentalism, but I shall go more in depth on Invictus’s view on the energy crisis. Augustus Invictus realizes that we are far too dependent on foreign energy sources. This dependence is one of the many causes of our horrific foreign policy decisions. Invictus fully supports finding alternative energy sources to solve this problem. Perhaps deregulating the energy sector will provoke a greater innovation in green energy that will end our dependence on foreign, harmful, and frequently unethical energy sources.
Invictus follows the NAP and is proud of it. In his website, he has a brief on his dogma against the initiation of force. If a candidate believes in the NAP, whether axiomatic or not, please vote for him or her. We need people that will promote the principle of not hitting people and not taking their things in the state while it still exists. These are the people that can work within the system to create a voluntary society.
Once again, Invictus is against an open border policy. He acknowledges the failure of our current system and claims we need a new method to ensure illegal immigrants aren’t worshiped and legal immigrant’s aren’t treated poorly. Invictus stated: “Open borders, amnesty to illegal immigrants, and the recruitment of refugees: these are suicidal policies that must be ended.” Amnesty is not a legitimate act for illegal immigrants. See the statistics on how generally they support big government. Just a reminder to pro-refugee libertarians, it costs money, tax money, to bring in refugees. For more information on how open borders and libertarianism is not compatible, Rand and Ron Paul, Hans Hermann-Hoppe, and Stefan Molyneux are all incredible sources on the topic.
Augustus Invictus is against Net Neutrality and FCC Regulation of the internet. Invictus sees the problem as not the lack of regulation, but the massive subsidies to ISPs that only form monopolies in technology. Invictus believes in a free internet without government regulation; one will not have to worry about their freedom of speech and expression with his voice in the Senate floor.
The FDA wouldn’t have a greater enemy in the senate than Augustus Invictus. Invictus has seen that the FDA does more harm than good. He realizes that we, as consumers, have a much greater regulatory power than one single agency. If a drug is not safe and hurts people, or even not tested well enough, the consumer ought to have the common sense to not purchase that drug. In essence, Augustus Invictus believes individuals can vote with their wallets.
Augustus Invictus believes the 10th Amendment ought to settle the abortion debate. Nowhere in the constitution is the federal government granted to regulate a medical matter, therefore, abortion ought to be left up to the states. While I am an evictionist, I recognize the implausibility of my position being possible in the near future. Devolving abortion to the states may just be the push we need to make it possible for a woman to exercise her right to remove a baby without violating the baby’s right to life. The more localized a position is, the more likely that position is to make progress.
So what do we see here? We see a man who is a lover of liberty and an enemy of statism. Augustus Invictus is a friend of reducing government. Any libertarian ought to vote for him. In the Senate, Augustus Invictus would be a champion of liberty and would do a splendid job preserving the rights of the individual. Please visit invictusforsenate.com and listen to his speeches, fireside chats, learn more about Augustus Invictus, and see how a true libertarian can change America. We may need him more than he needs us.

  • Gadfly156

    “So what do we see here? We see a man who is a lover of liberty and an enemy of statism. Augustus Invictus is a friend of reducing government. Any libertarian ought to vote for him. In the Senate, Augustus Invictus would be a champion of liberty and would do a splendid job preserving the rights of the individual. Please visit invictusforsenate.com and listen to his speeches, fireside chats, learn more about Augustus Invictus, and see how a true libertarian can change America. We may need him more than he needs us.”

    DO IT!!! 😀

    • Which is going to inspire more people the candidate the dangerous Libertarian or the same old Libertarian? Yup.