Augustus Invictus Calls for “Total Insurrection”

From Libertarian Party U.S. Senate hopeful Augustus Invictus on LinkedIn:

It is to inspire – and not to instill fear – that I ask: How far are you willing to go?

If that question does not send a shiver up your spine, then I don’t think you have given it much thought. Because I’m not asking you whether you are willing to get off your ass and vote; or whether you are willing to bitch and moan on the internet; or whether you are willing to wear ironic t-shirts to piss off your co-workers.

I am asking what you are willing to sacrifice. I am asking what you are willing to risk.

But, as Seneca warned, we must “[b]e wary of the man who urges an action in which he himself incurs no risk.” So, lest you think that what I am about to say to you is all talk; lest you think I do not practice what I preach or that I have not suffered persecution by those invested in the System; please allow me to introduce myself.

My name is Augustus Invictus. I am a member of the Executive Committee of the Libertarian Party of Orange County, and I am a Candidate for the United States Senate.

I am also a father, an attorney in four States and the federal courts, and a business owner, so I have a lot to lose. I am also an Old World pagan and a White Southerner, so I know what it’s like to be treated as the wolf in the hen house.

I am banned for life from my graduate business school; my law school in Chicago had me hunted by the FBI two years ago; federal lawyers in Orlando had me investigated by the U.S. Marshals last fall; earlier this year I was forced off the board of trustees for an Orange County school; I was trespassed just last week from my own office building, where I have had my law firm for the past two and a half years. And we are only at the beginning, my friends. So fear not that what I speak of tonight is somehow distant from my own life.

A great man once said, “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” And here I tell you further: Think not that I am come to send a sword where I fear to tread.

Do you know why the Christians were so successful? It is because they would rather have been crucified than to buy into the Roman system.

Do you know why the Communists were so successful? It is because they were willing to die for what they believed justice to be.

Do you know why we and the French no longer have monarchies? It is because our revolutionary forefathers lived what we cannot even admit to ourselves: that no fundamental change in Government comes without great upheaval, without crisis, without danger.

We want change, but we do not want to fight for it. We want something different, but we do not want the disruption. We want better lives, but we want to live in blissful isolation, detached from the nastiness of the political world. But that is a fantasy, one we have believed in for far too long.

Every creed and every flag has a thousand graveyards to honor it. And if you do not like that, then go out into the Wilderness and try to escape it. But mark my words: One day, someone with a flag – or a holy book or a corporation – will come traipsing into your solitude, and they will conquer you and your family, and your weak stomach will have cost you dearly. For you will have abandoned not just your homeland, but your dignity, as well. You must stand and fight, for your flag and your creed; to run away is to delay the war for another day, to the disgrace of you and yours. We cannot escape the human condition.

My brutal way of putting such truths is offsetting to many. But when you hear my way of speaking and my solutions contrasted with those of more “reasonable” men, of men less “insane,” do not confuse vice with virtue. Many think themselves good – when they are merely docile. Many think themselves self-restrained – when they are merely obedient. Many think themselves loyal to their country and to their party, when they are merely too scared to stand up for themselves.

So when you go home tonight, each of you, I want you to do something. I want you to look into the mirror and ask yourself: Are you in politics because our righteous System just needs a few adjustments? Or because the System is fucked?

Now, if you think we just need some modifications in government but that things are generally going well & in the right direction, then don’t waste your time listening to me. Watch the televised debates, hold your breath to see whether Clinton and Bush will pull it off in the primaries, talk idly about how corruption displeases you, vote on Election Day, and keep complaining when nothing changes. Forget that I even exist.

But if you are engaged in political action because you know the system is fucked, then ask yourself one more question: Why are you so convinced that playing within the system could ever be the answer?

And yet this is the answer our so-called leaders have been selling us our entire lives:Change comes slowly. Be patient. The System works. You just have to be a part of it, and then it will work for you.

Do you not hear the creed of the cult of the System therein? Be one of us, and the System will work for you. Believe in the System, and the System will work for you. Work for the System, and the System will work for you.

I reject this cult and its creed. And I have taught my children what my father taught me: Be in the world, but not of it.

Go to school and get good grades, not because what they are teaching you is true, but because you need the piece of paper at the end to prove you are educated – because otherwise no one will listen to you.

Wear a tie and comb your hair, not because that makes you better than other people, but because you must be presentable to prove that you can play the game – because otherwise no one will listen to you.

Read the newspaper and keep up on current events, not because there is some intrinsic importance in what the media is selling you, but because you must be conversant in what those around you are thinking – because otherwise no one will listen to you.

Do you know why artists are allowed to say and do whatever they like? It is because they are impotent. In the Grey World of Man, where law, finance, and government comprise our framework of existence, artists have no power to affect our lives in any tangible way. The artist can be as freethinking as he wants, because as long as he stays in the margins and does not cross over into the “real” world, he does not threaten the System.

Do you know why I am dangerous? It is not because anyone actually believes that I’m going to lose my mind and go on a shooting rampage. It is not because I have a hundred pounds of fertilizer in a toolshed ready for bomb-making. It is because I am an artist who has wandered like a black wolf into the “real” world. It is because I have the power to turn the System against itself.

See, when a schizophrenic man with disheveled hair spits and spews on a street corner, holding a sign that says, THE END IS NIGH, he is easy to brush off. We pass by him, laughing. We repent not.

But when I say, “I have prophesied for years that I was born for a Great War” it is no longer funny. People try to mock, and they pretend to laugh me off as that crazy guy on the street corner – not because I am uneducated or unpresentable or ignorant – but because when I speak, people listen. And for my critics to think that their sons and daughters might be listening; to think that they might reject the System their parents bought into and sacrifice their lives for something real; well that is terrifying. So they must resort to mockery – because they have no arguments against what I am saying.

If my critics stopped being frivolous for five minutes and admitted to themselves that what I am saying is not half as crazy as the fact that I am saying it in public, they would be forced to admit that they are living a life of compromise with the System. And I wonder which is more terrifying: to lose a child to a cause – or to lose the respect of that child when she discovers that her parents were cowards who made a virtue of submission?

I do not want you to submit. I want you to revolt. I want you to be total insurrectionists, in mind and body, in spirit and in heart. I want you to be dangerous, so that the System takes notice of you and turns its machines toward your destruction. I want each and every one of you to be a legitimate threat.

I am often asked why I am running for Senate as a Libertarian – as though being a Libertarian were not reason enough. And I answer that I am campaigning as a Libertarian because the Libertarian Party is dangerous – or at least it should be – as the enemy of the two-party System.

But our leaders want us to compromise our integrity and to play within the System. Our leaders want to be invited by the Republicans and the Democrats to their debates. Our leaders want to be politely included in the discourse. They want us to play the game created by the Republicans and the Democrats: talk like them, strategize like them, organize like them, conform like them.

But our so-called leaders have clearly never read Sun Tzu’s Art of War. If they had, they would know that you do not attack the fortresses of your opponent. You do not meet a stronger army on open ground. You do not fight against your opponent’s strengths.

If we had leaders instead of bureaucrats & salesmen, we would be attacking our opponents’strategy, not their strongholds. We would not be begging for inclusion – we would be embracing our position as outsiders.

So this is what I propose: Disown your leaders who have advised you to sell out. Stop trying to sneak into the two-party system, and abandon your faith in it entirely. Stop playing their game and create your own. Stop trying to earn a comfortable spot in the System, and infiltrate it to turn it against itself. Because otherwise, you are fighting a war you cannot win. Without first engaging in social and cultural insurrection, there can be no true political change. If you think you are going to save the world by voting a Libertarian into the Senate, you are dreaming. And if that is your mindset when you go out posting my flyers and wearing my t-shirts, you might as well be polishing the brass on the Titanic.

I do not want you to vote, so much as I want you to wake up. I want you to drop out and tune in. I want you to take LSD and practice sorcery. I want you to listen to trap music and black metal, to learn the law and to break it deliberately, to find your own religion. I want you to learn the use of firearms and subject yourselves to rigorous physical training. I want you to treat your bodies as Holy Temples and to take your girlfriend to a strip club so you can seduce a dancer in the back room. I want you to worship Nature and dance naked in the moonlight ‘round the fire, screaming in ecstatic joy. I want you to revolt. Raise Hell. Break your limitations. Renounce your life and go into the Wilderness, that God may speak to you of things to come.

The Christians were successful because they would rather have been crucified than to buy into the Roman system.

The Communists were successful because they were willing to die for what they believed justice to be.

Our forefathers were successful because they knew that no fundamental change in Government comes without great upheaval, without crisis, without danger.

We, all of us, must make sacrifices. We must see our fight for freedom not as a hobby or a volunteer opportunity, but as an existential struggle. If you think we are going to vote a new country into existence in the next election, or the election after that, you are simply divorced from reality. The government of a people reflects the culture of a people. And if we have seen our Government become frivolous, money-hungry, and willfully ignorant, then we have only ourselves to blame. The System cannot exist without our acceptance of it.

So we must cut this corrupt System out of our hearts. And that is something your leaders have proved themselves incapable of doing. They talk to you of fighting the System – and yet what sacrifices have they really made? What persecution have they suffered? Have they given their lives for your freedom – or have they made politics their career? Learn the difference, and you will learn the mark of a true leader.

The so-called leaders of the System have always pandered to the lukewarm; and with salaries and titles and benefits packages they have bought off those strong enough to fight back. When you have an executive suite, a dental plan, a Mercedes, and a membership at a golf club like this one, why in God’s name would you want to rock the boat? That would beinsane. Who would want to risk imprisonment, death, or exile in the name of Justice – when Janet Jackson is coming to Orlando next month, and I’m so close to getting that promotion at work, and the kids started back at school today. Call it wisdom, if you will; I call it selling out. I call it the betrayal of your country and of your soul.

Let the uncontroversial, the cowards, the weak-stomached stay far from me. I do not want sycophants and sheep in my camp: I want revolutionaries. Let the beer-gutted trolls and the safe old nannies stay deep within my critics’ camp. I want the brutal fighters and the voluptuous seducers, the promiscuous and the quick-tempered. I want those of you who are so free that your very existence is an act of rebellion. Give me ten youth with such fire & self-discipline, and I will give you a New America.

But I also want you: the law enforcement officers watching this video; the FBI agents and US Marshals who have shown such an interest in me; the cops who will, sooner or later, be sent to arrest me. Though we are soldiers, we are not enemies. I will address you soon enough, but in the meantime I want you to ask yourselves which is worse: getting high on cocaine – or the countless casualties of the Drug War; failing to pay one’s taxes on time – or our leaders’ recklessness in raising our national debt to $18 trillion; engaging in prostitution – or selling out our children’s generation? Search your own hearts; for the time may come soon when you must ask yourselves which you love more: your country or your paycheck.

That is indeed the question for all of us, My Fellow Americans. We must decide where our loyalties lie, whether with the Government or with our Nation; with the politicians or with our families; with those in power, or with those we love.

In the coming days,

may the Goddess bless our campaign,

and may God bless the United States of America.

Augustus Sol Invictus

Lakeland, Florida USA

XXIV AVGVSTVS MMXV LVNA

62 thoughts on “Augustus Invictus Calls for “Total Insurrection”

  1. paulie

    I am banned for life from my graduate business school; my law school in Chicago had me hunted by the FBI two years ago; federal lawyers in Orlando had me investigated by the U.S. Marshals last fall; earlier this year I was forced off the board of trustees for an Orange County school; I was trespassed just last week from my own office building, where I have had my law firm for the past two and a half years. And we are only at the beginning, my friends. So fear not that what I speak of tonight is somehow distant from my own life.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwDpAfFzcRQ

  2. Thomas L. Knapp

    On the one hand, a lot of what he’s saying is true.

    On the other hand, he’s coming out in a weird way against the system by working the system in the normal way. A US Senate candidacy based on what he’s saying seems even more masturbatory than a reformist one.

    On the third hand, he’s not Roger Stone and is therefore clearly and automatically the superior of the two people I know of planning to seek the Libertarian Party’s US Senate nomination.

    So right now, I guess I’m at 2 points to 1 in favor of Invictus.

  3. Robert Capozzi

    ai: I am also an Old World pagan and a White Southerner, so I know what it’s like to be treated as the wolf in the hen house.

    me: I just don’t know where to go with this information. The fox becomes a wolf during the 4th blood moon during the Feast of the Tabernacles when Obama is revealed to be Nostradamus’s “Mabus.” ???

    Hold HIGH the Banner!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBzJGckMYO4

  4. paulie

    I just don’t know where to go with this information. The fox becomes a wolf during the 4th blood moon during the Feast of the Tabernacles when Obama is revealed to be Nostradamus’s “Mabus.” ???

    Clearly you haven’t taken enough LSD and cocaine to understand fully.

  5. Robert Capozzi

    J: “Assassination Politics”, cryptome.org/ap.htm

    me: I’m afraid to go there. It feels like I might download a virus from such a site.

  6. 27B-6

    If I was under house arrest for the heinous crime of cartooning in the State of Florida, USSA, he’d have my vote. Heck, if I even “lived” in Florida under the conditions of a normal tax serf, he’d have my vote. In fact, even though running for US Senate as a Libertarian is delusional (perhaps indicative of an absence of the “strategy” gene), I like the statements this guy makes. If he were running for Florida State Legislature, I might even send him some coin.

  7. 27B-6

    Invictus doesn’t seem any crazier than any other big-L Libertarian, and perhaps half as delusional as anyone who thinks the LP’s ongoing non-strategy is accomplishing anything except slightly assisting the status quo. At least he seems to know that winning would require a pulse. This puts him ahead of 99% of the people associated with the LP, including Moulton and Sarwark.

  8. jim

    Here is part 1 of the AP essay:
    I’ve been following the concepts of digital cash and encryption since I read the article in the August 1992 issue of Scientific American on”encrypted signatures.” While I’ve only followed the Digitaliberty area for a few weeks, I can already see a number of points that do (and should!) strongly concern the average savvy individual:

    1. How can we translate the freedom afforded by the Internet to ordinary life?

    2. How can we keep the government from banning encryption, digital cash, and other systems that will improve our freedom?

    A few months ago, I had a truly and quite literally “revolutionary” idea, and I jokingly called it “Assassination Politics”: I speculated on the question of whether an organization could be set up to legally announce that it would be awarding a cash prize to somebody who correctly “predicted” the death of one of a list of violators of rights, usually either government employees, officeholders, or appointees. It could ask for anonymous contributions from the public, and individuals would be able send those contributions using digital cash.

    I also speculated that using modern methods of public-key encryption and anonymous “digital cash,” it would be possible to make such awards in such a way so that nobody knows who is getting awarded the money, only that the award is being given. Even the organization itself would have no information that could help the authorities find the person responsible for the prediction, let alone the one who caused the death.

    It was not my intention to provide such a “tough nut to crack” by arguing the general case, claiming that a person who hires a hit man is not guilty of murder under libertarian principles. Obviously, the problem with the general case is that the victim may be totally innocent under libertarian principles, which would make the killing a crime, leading to the question of whether the person offering the money was himself guilty.

    On the contrary; my speculation assumed that the “victim” is a government employee, presumably one who is not merely taking a paycheck of stolen tax dollars, but also is guilty of extra violations of rights beyond this. (Government agents responsible for the Ruby Ridge incident and Waco come to mind.) In receiving such money and in his various acts, he violates the “Non-aggression Principle” (NAP) and thus, presumably, any acts against him are not the initiation of force under libertarian principles.

    The organization set up to manage such a system could, presumably, make up a list of people who had seriously violated the NAP, but who would not see justice in our courts due to the fact that their actions were done at the behest of the government. Associated with each name would be a dollar figure, the total amount of money the organization has received as a contribution, which is the amount they would give for correctly “predicting” the person’s death, presumably naming the exact date. “Guessers” would formulate their “guess” into a file, encrypt it with the organization’s public key, then transmit it to the organization, possibly using methods as untraceable as putting a floppy disk in an envelope and tossing it into a mailbox, but more likely either a cascade of encrypted anonymous remailers, or possibly public-access Internet locations, such as terminals at a local library, etc.

    In order to prevent such a system from becoming simply a random unpaid lottery, in which people can randomly guess a name and date (hoping that lightning would strike, as it occasionally does), it would be necessary to deter such random guessing by requiring the “guessers” to include with their “guess” encrypted and untraceable “digital cash,” in an amount sufficiently high to make random guessing impractical.

    For example, if the target was, say, 50 years old and had a life expectancy of 30 years, or about 10,000 days, the amount of money required to register a guess must be at least 1/10,000th of the amount of the award. In practice, the amount required should be far higher, perhaps as much as 1/1000 of the amount, since you can assume that anybody making a guess would feel sufficiently confident of that guess to risk 1/1000th of his potential reward.

    The digital cash would be placed inside the outer “encryption envelope,” and could be decrypted using the organization’s public key. The prediction itself (including name and date) would be itself in another encryption envelope inside the first one, but it would be encrypted using a key that is only known to the predictor himself. In this way, the organization could decrypt the outer envelope and find the digital cash, but they would have no idea what is being predicted in the innermost envelope, either the name or the date.

    If, later, the “prediction” came true, the predictor would presumably send yet another encrypted “envelope” to the organization, containing the decryption key for the previous “prediction” envelope, plus a public key (despite its name, to be used only once!) to be used for encryption of digital cash used as payment for the award. The organization would apply the decryption key to the prediction envelope, discover that it works, then notice that the prediction included was fulfilled on the date stated. The predictor would be, therefore, entitled to the award. Nevertheless, even then nobody would actually know WHO he is!

    It doesn’t even know if the predictor had anything to do with the outcome of the prediction. If it received these files in the mail, in physical envelopes which had no return address, it would have burned the envelopes before it studied their contents. The result is that even the active cooperation of the organization could not possibly help anyone, including the police, to locate the predictor.

    Also included within this “prediction-fulfilled” encryption envelope would be unsigned (not-yet-valid) “digital cash,” which would then be blindly signed by the organization’s bank and subsequently encrypted using the public key included. (The public key could also be publicized, to allow members of the public to securely send their comments and, possibly, further grateful remuneration to the predictor, securely.) The resulting encrypted file could be published openly on the Internet, and it could then be decrypted by only one entity: The person who had made that original, accurate prediction. The result is that the recipient would be absolutely untraceable.

    The digital cash is then processed by the recipient by “unbinding” it, a principle which is explained in far greater detail by the article in the August 1992 issue of Scientific American. The resulting digital cash is absolutely untraceable to its source.

    This overall system achieves a number of goals. First, it totally hides the identity of the predictor to the organization, which makes it unnecessary for any potential predictor to “trust” them to not reveal his name or location. Second, it allows the predictor to make his prediction without revealing the actual contents of that prediction until later, when he chooses to, assuring him that his “target” cannot possibly get early warning of his intent (and “failed” predictions need never be revealed). In fact, he needs never reveal his prediction unless he wants the award. Third, it allows the predictor to anonymously grant his award to anyone else he chooses, since he may give this digital cash to anyone without fear that it will be traced.

    For the organization, this system also provides a number of advantages .By hiding the identity of the predictor from even it, the organization cannot be forced to reveal it, in either civil or criminal court. This should also shield the organization from liability, since it will not know the contents of any “prediction” until after it comes true. (Even so, the organization would be deliberately kept “poor” so that it would be judgment-proof.) Since presumably most of the laws the organization might be accused of violating would require that the violator have specific or prior knowledge, keeping itself ignorant of as many facts as possible, for as long as possible, would presumably make it very difficult to prosecute.

  9. Thomas L. Knapp

    Bob,

    Actually, cryptome is one of the least likely sites you’d ever expect to find a virus on. It’s maintained by hardcore, security-conscious crypto-anarchists. You’re more likely to run into a pork chop at a Passover seder.

  10. Jill Pyeatt

    Well, he’s a good writer, and I actually agree with a lot of what he’s saying. We DO need to fight for changes, and any changes needs to be extreme (at least, that’s how I’m feeling today). We need to make quantum leaps, and fast, if we’re going to save this country.

    I believe he and I would definitely disagree on where we want to go and how to get there, however.

  11. Robert Capozzi

    jp: We need to make quantum leaps, and fast, if we’re going to save this country.

    me: Historically, such “leaps” are more often than not negative and anti-liberty. Freeing up tends to happen incrementally. I see no evidence that John Q Public has a taste for such leaps, and to the extent they do, they are Trump or Sanders supporters, and such leaps go in the wrong direction.

    If correct, then that points in a survivalist direction.

    I’m more of a “somehow we muddle through” type, despite the scary levels of dysfunction that are unfolding.

  12. Thane "Goldie" Eichenauer

    I find his writing to be inspiring. It is easy to be boring, nearly anybody can bore and more often than not does. Also a brief document that inspires nobody is likewise easy to produce.

  13. Robert Capozzi

    tge: I find his writing to be inspiring.

    me; Inspiring what? Your desire to conduct a “total insurrection”?

    Firebrands can sometimes inspire some, but unfortunately the behavior they inspire are often counter-productive. George Wallace was “inspiring.” Huey Long was “inspiring.” Adolph Hitler was “inspiring.” Vladimir Lenin was “inspiring.”

    Not models of movements toward liberty, I’d suggest.

  14. Floyd Whitley

    The last time citizens had cannons in their hands in an insurrection of similar scope (though it too was not at par) did not turn out well…liberties were lost, and imperialism rose.

    That was back in the age of the horse. We are now in an age of artificial intelligence, drone swarms, plasma rail guns, cloaking devices, stealth craft, clones…

    You, citizens, no longer possess the military means should you choose violent insurrection as your field. With this level of disparity in weaponry, the only thing at the end of such a call for armed insurrection is more needless suffering, more waste, more loss, more anguish.

    Besides, change may be brought about in a number of ways; some lasting, some not. Violence is not. Its yield is universally ephemeral and bitter. Mob actions are also not. They inevitably become fractious, internecine.

    No. It is by the ballot, not the bullet that we shall prevail. If the pen is not mightier than the sword, there can be no real liberty.

    It is by integrity, it is by righteousness, it is by compassion, it is by principle, it is by faith, it is by knowledge and ultimately it is by God’s grace that just revolutions are won, not by the material strength of man’s arm alone. For such strength always fails; it is temporal, mortal.

    The field of battle in our age is, as it has always been, within the human heart upon the spiritual plane. It is there that true victory is won…or is lost. Therefore, do not be deceived.

  15. Thane "Goldie" Eichenauer

    rc: Inspiring what?

    me: “I want you to treat your bodies as Holy Temples and to take your girlfriend to a strip club so you can seduce a dancer in the back room.”

  16. George Phillies

    We may contrast this with the

    Official Monster Raving Loony Party

    of the United Kingdom, which campaigned for the insane proposal that you should give the vote to 18 year olds, and against the idea that you should push up the price of butter by throwing surplus butter and milk down abandoned mine shafts. On one occasion, the OMRLP candidate actually finished ahead of the candidate of a normal UK party, albeit a small one. That other party dissolved six days later.

    Let us honor the memory of its founder, Screaming Lord Sutch, who ran for Parliament 40 times, lost every time, but whose above ideas won.

  17. Joe Wendt

    Is Augustus a bit over the top, yeah. Is he crazy, probably no more than most Libertarians, I do believe eccentricity is a prerequisite for membership, lol. Although, he is far more sane than those who actually believe electing 1 Libertarian to Congress would actually change anything in DC (Ron Paul didn’t, and the two Independents in the Senate haven’t), or those who believe electing 1 Libertarian State Legislator would actually change anything in FL. But I do like the fact he is pointing out the problems within the leadership, and is advocating action to fight for principles. He gets my vote on election day.

  18. Andy

    “Joe Wendt

    August 25, 2015 at 11:29 pm

    Is Augustus a bit over the top, yeah. Is he crazy, probably no more than most Libertarians, I do believe eccentricity is a prerequisite for membership, lol. Although, he is far more sane than those who actually believe electing 1 Libertarian to Congress would actually change anything in DC (Ron Paul didn’t, and the two Independents in the Senate haven’t), or those who believe electing 1 Libertarian State Legislator would actually change anything in FL. But I do like the fact he is pointing out the problems within the leadership, and is advocating action to fight for principles. He gets my vote on election day.”

    Electing one Libertarian to Congress, or to a seat in a state legislature, is not going to bring us freedom. It would serve as a great morale booster for the Libertarian Party and movement though, and it would also help get the libertarian message out to a heck of a lot more people than who’d be exposed to it otherwise, and it could lead to more Libertarians being elected, and it could also lead to more people finding out about things that they can do outside of electoral politics to move the country in the direction of more freedom, like jury nullification of victimless crimes, home schooling, alternative currencies, etc…

  19. Andy Craig

    Crazy is only part of the problem. Crazy and racist and fascist and flirting with advocating violence is a better statement of the problem. Say what you will about Roger Stone, I don’t see him threatening to start an apocalyptic war and advocating eugenics or being publicly insane any time recently. If I was a Florida Libertarian who went to the polls on primary day and found Augustus Invictus vs. Roger Stone as my only options, that isn’t even a close question.

    And if somebody looks at AI’s public record and says he’s no more crazy than most Libertarians, that’s speaking very poorly of Libertarians and whether or not we deserve to get elected to anything. We’ve nominated some questionable candidates, who perhaps didn’t make the best impression on voters. But if you can’t draw the line at AI, I question whether you can draw the line anywhere.

  20. Andy

    Augustus does have some good things to say, I will give him this, but the problem is that the more that you listen to or read what he says, you will start to see him go off in some pretty non-libertarian, and quite frankly, weird (and not in a good way), directions.

    I’ve got to wonder if Augustus is some kind of government plant, who has been sent in to make Libertarians look bad. While there are certainly grounds for another American Revolution, the stuff Augustus says here also sounds like it could be coming from an agent provocateur. Also, the fact that Joe Wendt is supporting him should be regarded as a red flag.

    Regardless of whether or not Augustus is a government plant, or is just some wacky guy, it is a pretty sad state of affairs that he is the only other choice that Florida Libertarians have for US Senate besides Roger Stone.

    Is there still time for other candidates to enter the race? It would be nice to see a better candidate jump in the race for the Libertarian Party nomination for US Senate in Florida.

    If I were a registered Libertarian voter in Florida, I’d leave my ballot blank for this one, or I’d write in None Of The Above (if you can do write in votes).

  21. Andy

    “Andy Craig

    August 26, 2015 at 12:34 am

    Crazy is only part of the problem. Crazy and racist and fascist and flirting with advocating violence is a better statement of the problem”

    Yes, this is the problem.

    “Say what you will about Roger Stone, I don’t see him threatening to start an apocalyptic war and advocating eugenics or being publicly insane any time recently.”

    Even so, he’s not an appropriate candidate either.

  22. Andy Craig

    “Even so, he’s not an appropriate candidate either.”

    I tend to agree, but he isn’t even the same ballpark of inappropriateness as AI.

  23. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Is there still time for other candidates to enter the race? It would be nice to see a better candidate jump in the race for the Libertarian Party nomination for US Senate in Florida.”

    Yes, there’s still time, and I hear Mike Kane is considering it. I hope he throws in. Alternatively, I’d like to see Warren Redlich run for it and whip Stone’s ass.

    It will be a cold day in hell before I vote for, or in any way materially support, Stone. Hopefully Invictus won’t be the only Libertarian alternative.

  24. Andy

    “Thomas L. Knapp

    August 26, 2015 at 12:57 am

    ‘Is there still time for other candidates to enter the race? It would be nice to see a better candidate jump in the race for the Libertarian Party nomination for US Senate in Florida.’

    Yes, there’s still time, and I hear Mike Kane is considering it. I hope he throws in. Alternatively, I’d like to see Warren Redlich run for it and whip Stone’s ass.”

    I recall something about Stone trying to sabotage Redlich’s campaign for Governor of New York (I know he ended up backing Kristen Davis for Governor). This could be a good opportunity for Redlich to get some pay back for that.

    Almost any Libertarian Party member would be better than the two candidates who are currently in the race for the Libertarian Party US Senate nomination in Florida.

  25. Thomas L. Knapp

    My impression — and it’s JUST my impression — is that there’s substantial support for Stone among the Florida LP leadership.

    Stone was Davis’s mentor/sponsor manager when she ran for the New York LP’s 2010 gubernatorial nomination. When she lost to Warren Redlich, he ran her under a party line created solely for her, and ran a very nasty anti-Redlich campaign that included fliers in Redlich’s neighborhood portraying Redlich as a pedophile. It turned out that he was working for the Republican candidate as well. There’s little doubt in my mind that Stone was directly responsible, and intentionally so, for Redlich just missing the 50k vote mark that would have established continuing ballot access for LPNY.

  26. Andy

    I don’t know if Augustus is an agent provocateur or not, but one has got to wonder given some of his comments. Regardless of whether he is or is not, the video below is pretty interesting.

    Stuff They Don’t Want You to Know – Dirty Tricks: Agent Provocateur

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CGqWHaMhNM

  27. Andy

    “Thomas L. Knapp

    August 26, 2015 at 1:11 am

    My impression — and it’s JUST my impression — is that there’s substantial support for Stone among the Florida LP leadership.

    Stone was Davis’s mentor/sponsor manager when she ran for the New York LP’s 2010 gubernatorial nomination. When she lost to Warren Redlich, he ran her under a party line created solely for her, and ran a very nasty anti-Redlich campaign that included fliers in Redlich’s neighborhood portraying Redlich as a pedophile. It turned out that he was working for the Republican candidate as well. There’s little doubt in my mind that Stone was directly responsible, and intentionally so, for Redlich just missing the 50k vote mark that would have established continuing ballot access for LPNY.”

    Nobody should vote for Stone to be an LP candidate based on this alone.

  28. paulie

    Stone was Davis’s mentor/sponsor manager when she ran for the New York LP’s 2010 gubernatorial nomination. When she lost to Warren Redlich, he ran her under a party line created solely for her, and ran a very nasty anti-Redlich campaign that included fliers in Redlich’s neighborhood portraying Redlich as a pedophile. It turned out that he was working for the Republican candidate as well. There’s little doubt in my mind that Stone was directly responsible, and intentionally so, for Redlich just missing the 50k vote mark that would have established continuing ballot access for LPNY.”

    Nobody should vote for Stone to be an LP candidate based on this alone.

    Exactly!

  29. paulie

    One has got to wonder about both Augustus and Stone.

    Infiltration – COINTELPRO

    Indeed.

    Although, they are still just as bad even if they are not agents or infiltrators.

  30. paulie

    My impression — and it’s JUST my impression — is that there’s substantial support for Stone among the Florida LP leadership.

    They deny it, and say it is only to stop Invictus. However, I have a hard time believing that with all the party members and activists in FL they can’t find one other person willing to throw their name in the race against Invictus and Stone and back that person with at least 10k raised between all of them.

    I know there are enough people with enough money in that party to put that together, and enough who have been willing to run for office at various times in the past.

    It seems more like Invictus is a convenient foil when pressed on why supporting Stone is a bad idea, along with the other line “we’re not supporting either of them” even though it’s pretty easu to see where sympathies lie and the fact that there is no serious effort to recruit and back an additional candidate as far as I can see.

  31. paulie

    I recall something about Stone trying to sabotage Redlich’s campaign for Governor of New York (I know he ended up backing Kristen Davis for Governor). This could be a good opportunity for Redlich to get some pay back for that.

    It would also be a good opportunity for Stone to reprise his attacks and ruin Warren’s name in yet another community. Already asked Warren and he said no.

    Almost any Libertarian Party member would be better than the two candidates who are currently in the race for the Libertarian Party US Senate nomination in Florida.

    Agreed!

  32. paulie

    Yes, there’s still time, and I hear Mike Kane is considering it. I hope he throws in.

    I do too, but he needs the 10k, and I don’t think there’s been much progress on that front.

    It will be a cold day in hell before I vote for, or in any way materially support, Stone. Hopefully Invictus won’t be the only Libertarian alternative.

    Agreed.

  33. paulie

    “Even so, he’s not an appropriate candidate either.”

    I tend to agree, but he isn’t even the same ballpark of inappropriateness as AI.

    They are both highly inappropriate, just in different ways.

  34. paulie

    Augustus does have some good things to say, I will give him this, but the problem is that the more that you listen to or read what he says, you will start to see him go off in some pretty non-libertarian, and quite frankly, weird (and not in a good way), directions.

    Yep.

    I’ve got to wonder if Augustus is some kind of government plant, who has been sent in to make Libertarians look bad. While there are certainly grounds for another American Revolution, the stuff Augustus says here also sounds like it could be coming from an agent provocateur. Also, the fact that Joe Wendt is supporting him should be regarded as a red flag.

    Regardless of whether or not Augustus is a government plant, or is just some wacky guy, it is a pretty sad state of affairs that he is the only other choice that Florida Libertarians have for US Senate besides Roger Stone.

    Right again.

    Is there still time for other candidates to enter the race? It would be nice to see a better candidate jump in the race for the Libertarian Party nomination for US Senate in Florida.

    Yes and yes.

    If I were a registered Libertarian voter in Florida, I’d leave my ballot blank for this one, or I’d write in None Of The Above (if you can do write in votes).

    Same here.

    However, I am still wondering why there is at least apparently no serious effort to recruit and fund a different candidate besides Stone and Invictus?

  35. paulie

    Crazy is only part of the problem. Crazy and racist and fascist and flirting with advocating violence is a better statement of the problem.

    Exactly.

    Say what you will about Roger Stone, I don’t see him threatening to start an apocalyptic war and advocating eugenics or being publicly insane any time recently.

    No, just attacking LPNY and GJ12 with a knife to the back, backing Trump, etc., along with the rest of his sordid history.

    If I was a Florida Libertarian who went to the polls on primary day and found Augustus Invictus vs. Roger Stone as my only options

    That would be like having Stalin and Hitler as your only options. Not good enough!

  36. paulie

    Electing one Libertarian to Congress, or to a seat in a state legislature, is not going to bring us freedom. It would serve as a great morale booster for the Libertarian Party and movement though, and it would also help get the libertarian message out to a heck of a lot more people than who’d be exposed to it otherwise, and it could lead to more Libertarians being elected, and it could also lead to more people finding out about things that they can do outside of electoral politics to move the country in the direction of more freedom, like jury nullification of victimless crimes, home schooling, alternative currencies, etc…

    I agree.

  37. Joe Wendt

    “I am still wondering why there is at least apparently no serious effort to recruit and fund a different candidate besides Stone and Invictus?”

    Because the LPF leadership are so delusional that they believe Stone is the best representative of the Party, knowing full well about his sordid history. They want someone who hasn’t been active within the party at a local/state level, and would rather promote Trump than the LP. At least Augustus, for all his perceived faults, is active at a local level and currently serves on his local affiliate’s Executive Committee.

  38. paulie

    They claim they don’t really like Stone, and by turns either say that they are not supporting anyone or only supporting Stone to stop Invictus. I don’t really buy either explanation.

  39. Andy


    paulie

    August 27, 2015 at 12:59 am

    They claim they don’t really like Stone, and by turns either say that they are not supporting anyone or only supporting Stone to stop Invictus. I don’t really buy either explanation.”

    It would not surprise me if Stone (and/or whoever else he is working with) recruited Invictus to run against to make himself appear more attractive as a candidate.

  40. Adrian Wyllie

    @Joe Wendt, I surprised that you’re still commenting on these threads. I’m wouldn’t think you’d have the time, now that you’re a registered Republican campaigning for Rick Santorum.

    @Paulie, I assure you we made every effort to recruit several potential U.S. Senate candidates for 2016, and the process still continues. Most potential candidates I contacted rejected the idea outright. A few very solid Florida Libertarians flirted with the notion, before ultimately declining. The LPF leadership can only lead the horses to water, so to speak.

  41. paulie

    @Joe Wendt, I surprised that you’re still commenting on these threads. I’m wouldn’t think you’d have the time, now that you’re a registered Republican campaigning for Rick Santorum.

    True, but I expect Joe Wendt to most likely keep coming back to IPR, and maybe come in and out of the LP again (and again and again).

    @Paulie, I assure you we made every effort to recruit several potential U.S. Senate candidates for 2016, and the process still continues. Most potential candidates I contacted rejected the idea outright. A few very solid Florida Libertarians flirted with the notion, before ultimately declining. The LPF leadership can only lead the horses to water, so to speak.

    I think the 10k is a significan barrier to most would-be candidates. If you can get several people together and raise the 10k it’s much more likely a candidate will emerge. While LPF can’t decide who primary voters pick, perhaps you can donate to a candidate that the party likes, or if that is illegal, do it as a PAC or informally as individuals. I’m sure you can attract out of state donors for this as well, assuming it’s not against your state laws. Good luck!

  42. Joe Wendt

    To Wyllie: I do not communicate with schmucks, so stop trying to talk to me.

    Paulie, Augustus is my friend, so I am going to comment, duh.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *