From Thomas L. Knapp, Florida Libertarian candidate for Congress, writing for The William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism. Original article can be found here.
American media seldom pay much attention to “third” political parties like the Libertarians and the Greens. They get footnotes in normal election coverage, with one exception: Sometimes someone weird shows up on a slow news day. Then it’s suddenly time to cover third parties.
Enter Augustus Sol Invictus, a declared candidate for US Senate from Florida, who plans to run on the Libertarian Party’s ballot line. You may have seen his name in your social media or news feed. He’s “trending.”
Invictus named himself after an ancient Roman sun god. He allegedly sacrificed a goat in the western desert somewhere. As an attorney, he’s defended white supremacist clients and some people believe that’s no coincidence. He’s supposedly called for civil war, mandatory eugenics programs and all kinds of other crazy, and definitely not Libertarian, stuff. [Disclosure: I am a Libertarian candidate for Congress from Florida too; I have never sacrificed a goat, don’t associate with white supremacists, and support neither civil war nor eugenics]
The Libertarian Party of Florida’s executive committee censured Invictus and disassociated their party from him on Sunday. His views, they say, are not theirs — which should be obvious, but some things do have to be explicitly said, not just assumed.
And yet, there’s actually a possibility that he’ll show up on Florida primary ballots as a candidate for the Libertarian US Senate nomination. If so, and if he wins, the Florida LP is stuck with him as their standard-bearer.
It shouldn’t be that way. And at one time it wasn’t.
Until the late 19th century, American government didn’t print ballots, nor did it control the internal affairs of political parties. Voters cast ballots printed and provided by their parties of choice, or hand-wrote (or, if they couldn’t write, verbally swore to an election official) their ballots.
Starting in the 1880s, the states adopted the “Australian ballot.” Because government printed these ballots, government got to choose which candidates appeared on them. From that, a system of rules evolved which incorporated two express purposes: Keeping “third parties” off ballots with restrictive access laws, and robbing them of the ability to choose their own candidates, if they did manage to wangle ballot access, by forcing them into primary elections instead of nominations by convention.
All of this came about in the name of “reform,” to “take political decisions out of the smoke-filled rooms.” But that’s where the decisions are still made by the Democrats and Republicans. These restrictive laws don’t affect them nearly as much. Their party establishments are large, entrenched and powerful; they’re usually able to direct the voters instead of vice versa. It’s the third parties who get stuck with the weirdos. And with the media coverage that the weirdos bring.
A major step in real political reform would be to ditch the “Australian ballot” and its associated restrictions, returning to freedom of association for voters, candidates and political parties.
Florida’s Libertarians should be free to bury Caesar, rather than potentially forced to seemingly praise him.
Thomas L. Knapp is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.
Woohoo!
Augustus Invicus states that this will be his last fireside chat of 2015. It is 8 minutes long.
Fireside Chat on the Invictian Agenda
https://youtu.be/emJrpJoo9fY
I do. But more specifically, I think we need to ask whether he is a crazy person who sometimes acts sane, because he is able to compartmentalize and pretend to be sane for public consumption as he delusionally seeks dictatorial power based on his delusions of grandeur, or a sane person who sometimes acts crazy, at the behest of someone who wants to use him to discredit and destroy the LP and/or build himself up, perhaps Stone.
Paulie, I don’t think asking the question Is Invictus crazy (in any permutation) gets you anywhere useful. Knapp’s evaluations on Invictus here and elsewhere angle at answering the question by pointing out specific points about him that push people’s buttons. I don’t think he does any pretending when it comes to his positions. I do think whatever X factor he has that makes his talks more inspiring than most casuses many here a cognitive dissonance that is not well expressed. I am looking forward to the day Scott Adams (of Dilbert) does a column on Augustus Sol Invictus. Not that Adams would tell me anything I don’t already know but it might give others better descriptive terms than crazy or pretend sane.
I guess the real question is whether he is a sane person who sometimes pretends to be crazy or a crazy person who sometimes pretends to be sane.
Invictus: “The first step I want you to take is to destroy your television. And no I am not joking. Who sells you the wars we are fingting if not the mass media?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHkIGvyFxlo titled Fireside Chat on the Citizen Against the System
“she supports Invictus because “he is the most radical Libertarian in America” and she is an avid Donald Trump supporter”
Smart lady. I totally agree with her on both counts!
@5:22PM He also makes a standard error on the donation rule. The LNC successfully litigated over the 18-year-old age limit. Younger people may donate their own money.
I’m more interested in further connecting the dots to find more evidence that Stone put him up to running. Okyay denied personally knowing Stone, but says she supports Invictus because “he is the most radical Libertarian in America” and she is an avid Donald Trump supporter (just like Stone). Go figure!
Knapp stated above, “He’s supposedly called for civil war, mandatory eugenics programs and all kinds of other crazy, and definitely not Libertarian, stuff.”
I keep an eye and an ear on his presentations. If Invictus has already failed your test for craziness without hope for redemption then nothing he says can change that. Given that his last fireside chat was titled “Fireside Chat on Rooting Out the Collaborators” I imagine that Invictus is unlikely to be redeemed unless some great cataclysm bursts upon the field.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1fGaMRIksM
I don’t think anyone has disputed his ability to sound reasonable when the mood to do so strikes him. If he acted completely crazy all the time he would be less of a concern, actually.
“Meet Augustus Sol Invictus. He is the Libertarian Candidate running to fill Marco Rubio’s Senate seat. Mr. Invictus will discuss his campaign and his “Hot Topics” about the War on Drugs and the War on Terror.”
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/thecapt/2015/11/05/special-guest-fl-libertarian-senate-candidate-augustus-invictus
And that they did for nearly 2 hours. Mr. Invictus sounded like most other Libertarians that I have heard. Apart from a bit of accent he could have been the Arizona Libertarian Party nominee for US Senate in 2012 Marc J. Victor. They are both criminal defense attorneys.
I’m not so sure I’ll live to be an old man, so I am at that stage prematurely. If I had a lawn I’d be yelling at them kids to get off it and shaking my cane at them.
Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
I’m in it because I want a private nuclear weapon to use as a coffee table — until someone initiates force against me.
Vending machines?! I’ll be one of those angry old men who shakes his fist muttering “Those damn kids don’t know how good they’ve got it… when I was a boy I walked to school uphill (both ways) through the snow and had to use a ‘pager’ to alert my heroin dealer and drive a car to meet him in person… there wasn’t no ‘app’ on a magical personal assistant held in my hand that would get a flying robot to deliver my heroin in 10 minutes or less… damn spoiled kids…”
You can probably find whatever you are looking for with archive.org
While certain portions of the Invictus for Senate web site are down after a recent remodeling it would appear that the bitcoin address previously disclosed publicly has been whisked away behind web pages apparently intended to comply with the usual the federal campaign regulations.
Sadly the Issues and Library links have yet to be restored.
http://invictusforsenate.com/donations/
Okay well I have to rethink my whole involvement. I was in it to allow kids to be able to buy heroin in vending machines.
“Kids buying heroin in vending machines” is like “Who will build the roads?” It’s a common libertarian joke, a sarcastic reference to implausible attacks on libertarianism that allege some ridiculous parade of horribles would follow from adhering to libertarian policies.
I’m willing to bet that is the “one told us” being referenced, and WSJ either deliberately distorted that, or didn’t get the original sarcasm.
The WSJ link does not appear to have anything to do with Invictus, at least not as far as I could read before it goes behind some pay or survey wall. Assuming the quote is accurate, it is mischaracterization of libertarianism, and even if it was true it would have nothing to do with torturing animals, if it’s true that Invictus did that to the goat before he killed it.
I listened to Episode 44 mentioned above. Commenting on other Invictus coverage the Wall Street Journal author writes:
Libertarians (or so one told us once) think children should be allowed to buy heroin from vending machines, so long as the vending machines are privately owned. You’d think their response to the goat story would be “Meh.”
http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-promise-made-to-be-broken-1444411204
Wow, two of my least favorite people … should be interesting!
“So it is my distinct honor to be joined this Friday, October 9th at 5pm Eastern for a very special episode of the Radical Agenda, with our guest Augustus Sol Invictus.”
http://christophercantwell.com/2015/10/08/radical-agenda-ep044-%e2%80%8eaugustus-sol-invictus/
An hour and change from right now. For those that think there is something to be learned.
I haven’t heard of any plans like that.
Thane, that’s something that Invictus could do that Ls may actually support.
Just got word that there is another candidate who is not Invictus or Stone but not who it is yet.
No FEC information capture is evident on the coinbase.com widget. I wonder if attorney Augustus Sol Invictus plans to litigate a case in defense of anonymous political speech/donations?http://invictusforsenate.com/donations/
Mike Shipley suggested fundrazr
Unless I missed something, you can’t take regulated campaign contributions by just posting your bitcoin address publicly. You still have to collect the required information, observe the limits, you can’t do anonymous contributions. That’s why those who do take bitcoin for such purposes, do it through a third-party payment widget that collects all that information.
In case anybody wants to track how many Bitcoins the Committee to Elect Augustus Invictus has received..
https://blockchain.info/address/1MWQyohCrqiRRuQkEqKBvxsdeTYbFVBAvp
(Answer: Zero so far.)
Bitcoin address as listed on the Invictus for Senate / Donate page.
paulie wrote:
Good question! Not sure.
Does anyone have a good suggestion on how best to set up a tracking method with publicly visible progress and ability to pledge additional amounts to raise the 10k it would take Mike Kane to file for US Senate? There are pledges floating around on various IPR threads and FB discussions – can they be assembled in one place somehow? Anyone know how to set it up?
Indeed. I have read that source document (as you might infer from my comment on said page), read the LinkedIn document “Future or Ruin: The Argument for Eugenics” and listened to the 15 minute document (audio presentation) below, identified as having been recorded on May 31st, 2015 and then come to a conclusion. I will continue to read and learn about Augustus Sol Invictus. I may even change may opinion about him (or not).
Fireside Chat No. 2: On Eugenics & Civil War
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-gMxyGlbw0
If we are both sincere in our investigation and honest in our wish to come to a fuller understanding of the man and his positions i have no fear that the Florida elections in November of 2016 will be very interesting. I just might have more faith in the general goodness of people than others. So long as I continue to listen to your comments and other wise voices I don’t think you need worry much about my long term conclusions.
¡Carpe diem!
Thus, his current (as of 2.5 months ago) position is that it is a failing of government to no longer provide eugenics. Therefore it is a responsibility of government to provide eugenics, and it is a current position.
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/07/augustus-invictus-a-declaration-of-the-failings-of-the-federal-government/
Posted July 23 2015 on his campaign website
Failings of the government
I would also take 15 minutes to listen to his talk:
Fireside Chat No. 2: On Eugenics & Civil War
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-gMxyGlbw0
Caryn Ann Harlos Post author @ October 6, 2015 at 4:20 pm
“Now I believe that advocating eugenics is also clearly a violation of the most extreme sort.”
A natural followup question would be to ask would be “Is the question referring to state mandated eugenics or voluntary and private eugenics?” Further “What position does Augustus Sol Invictus currently hold on the topic of state mandated eugenics?”
Personally if I was interested in sincerely evaluating all the above questions I would read the source document that all this interest derives from.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/future-ruin-argument-eugenics-augustus-sol
I agree.
I listened to the meeting, and it was very interesting. I understand better the Party’s reluctance to revoke membership. I would have voted to revoke his membership. I understand the reluctance to not be the thought police and the fear that candidates will be reluctant to speak on any issue for fear that they will be accused of violating the NAP for things such as — supporting energy subsidies. There is no precedent for that in the history of the party and if it came to that, it can be dealt with. There is a controversy on precisely what the NAP pledge means to absolutely bind people to, but of one thing everyone is pretty much agreed, it is an agreement to avoid being labeled a terrorist group, and calling for open insurrection as an LP member is in fact doing that. We must be able to expel for that at a minimum. While some may in theory support the right for insurrection, we as a Party have decided to be committed to peaceful political means.
Now I believe that advocating eugenics is also clearly a violation of the most extreme sort. This does not get into any arguable issues of taxation or interim measures, but culling people out purposefully. I say taxation positions are arguable or interim because even our platform (past and present) allowed for interim measures and it would be irrational to say it was ultimately advocating force while requiring members to eschew this same force. One would have to reject the platform to join the party and that is completely irrational.
(Now if there were other concerns other than this that would prevent revocation that were not brought up, that could change my view)
Now if these are grounds for revocation, they are certainly grounds for censure and his statements on immigration and the ideas of a natural ruling class are also within bounds for the Party to censure. I am pleased that they decided to censure at a minimum. And I understand the reasons why this less drastic measure was taken.
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/09/thread-for-questions-to-augustus-invictus-senatorial-candidate-hopeful-for-the-libertarian-party-of-florida/
Sigh.
Just one of my many unanswered questions for Invictus, concerning a paper published on his campaign website July 23 of this year:
If you are not a racist, please explain what you meant by the following statements:
Is there something more legitimate about the states of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Egypt, and various others which the US government has also given billions of dollars of financial aid and military weaponry to? Why single out Israel?
Does that include the mother of your stepchildren or any of your Latina girlfriends?
Given that there are many religions in the US, not just Jews and Christians – you yourself describe yourself as a pagan – as well as many atheists and agnostics, why do you single out Jews here?
What would you change exactly in this regard, and how would it work? Is this a reference to eugenics? If not, what does it refer to?
Please elaborate.
This is described as a failing of the federal government. Exactly how would you rectify that?
Are you contending that Columbus did not engage in genocide or that Jefferson did not own slaves, or just that these shouldn’t be seen as bad things?
By “different breed of lesser men” do you mean something other than Black, African-American, Negro (or whatever term you prefer) men? If so, what do you mean?
Do you mean to insinuate something other than that all or almost all violent crime is committed by “slaves’ descendents”?
Taken in totality, please provide an explanation of these statements that is not racist.
paulie @ October 5, 2015 at 10:33 pm
“Then why did he say failure to practice eugenics is a failure of the federal government on July 23, 2015?” and then at some later date (apparently August 14th, 2015) had some interviewers respond “They sounded almost disappointed when Invictus said he doesn’t support “positive eugenics” anymore.”
Why? I don’t know.
I don’t have any information that isn’t readily available to you and everybody else via the internet. I don’t know Augustus Sol Invictus personally nor do I know anybody that is a client or friend of his. I don’t talk to Augustus Sol Invictus nor to I talk to anybody that is a client or friend of his.
I do know that, apparently, on September 8th, 2015 that Augustus Sol Invictus went to a eatery and pub named Frank and Steins in Winter Park, Florida and gave a 19 minute speech about the abuse of civil forfeiture, the transfer of military equipment to police forces in Florida and the coercion of a regular Joe in Florida to become a police drug informant that I was proud to see. I have no critique about his gesturing or his accent or lack thereof.
“Augustus Invictus on Fighting Against the Government”
https://youtu.be/JqfpMKiRZHo
Listening now.
https://www.freeconferencecall.com/wall/recorded_audio?audioRecordingUrl=https%3A%2F%2Frs0000.freeconferencecall.com%2Fstorage%2FsgetFCC2%2FD6vMY%2FFUbJM&subscriptionId=5112237
Recording of Sunday’s LPF EC call for anyone interested.
Working on it.
Should probably be a story here too.
Who’s up for placing links to the LPF condemning Invictus in the comments on all of them?
Yay! They are talking about us!
(Checks newsfeed)
Booooooo
GOOGLE says there’re now 170 stories on this, including Australia.
OK, football cheerleaders:
“There is only one God. He is the Sun God!
Ra! Ra! Ra!”
“Richard Winger says Florida doesn’t allow write-ins in primaries.”
It’s Richard Winger, so he’s almost certainly right.
http://pinellaslp.org/the-libertarian-party-of-pinellas-county-calls-for-the-libertarian-candidate-for-us-senate-to-disassociate-from-the-lpf/
“I’ll either withdraw or be a write-in candidate in the LP primary, for the LP ballot line in November.”
Richard Winger says Florida doesn’t allow write-ins in primaries.
Goat curry
Yum… I do like goat city.
Then why did he say failure to practice eugenics is a failure of the federal government on July 23, 2015? You claim to have read the IPR questions for Invictus. That was one of them.
Robert,
As Jed replies, I am running as a write-in, but my party affiliation is Libertarian. My campaign signs (first 100 purchased as an in-kind contribution by Stephen Meier!) read “Write in Tom Knapp for Congress — Your Libertarian Choice for Florida and Freedom.”
If another Libertarian should happen to throw in to this race, then I’ll either withdraw or be a write-in candidate in the LP primary, for the LP ballot line in November.
If no other LP candidate throws in, then I’ll be the Libertarian option, as a write-in.
I need to get a campaign calendar up. I’ve already got one firm event this month (a Students For Liberty conference in Gainesville), and another likely one (a marijuana legalization event in Bronson). Maybe more. The campaign-mobile is set up and rolling (trailer provided as an in-kind campaign contribution by Darcy Richardson). Now I’ve just got to get in shape for the long rides.
Perhaps. I think we’ve had enough LPF/Invictus posts for today, maybe tomorrow.
One thing a comment at Reason pointed out: his “campaign logo” is not just vaguely fascist. It’s literally the exact same image of an eagle as was used by Mussolini during the rump republic years. All he did was copy and paste the laurel on top of it (which on closer inspection is itself just the olive-branches off the UN flag.)
ASI’s campaign logo: https://d1jn4vzj53eli5.cloudfront.net/mc/_external/2015_10/invictus-for-senate-logo.jpg?h=219&w=260
The eagle used by Mussolini’s “Italian Social Republic” 1943-45: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ec/Eagle_with_fasces.svg/914px-Eagle_with_fasces.svg.png
He might as well be running with swastikas plastered all over his website.
Andy,I feel that would make a good stand-alone article if you want to write it up.
If you believe what he says in his interview on the Comcastro “geek culture podcast”, he’s no longer into eugenics (start at the 22:33 mark).
It’s often the soft, sentimental shut-ins who idolize cruelty and brutality, mistaking it for strength, free thought, and non-conformity, and the podcast hosts stuck to type. They seemed to be bigger fans of eugenics than Invictus, even in its watered-down social Darwinist form of cutting social programs to weed out the weak. In fact, they sounded almost disappointed when Invictus said he doesn’t go for “positive eugenics” anymore.
– See more at: http://www.joeydevilla.com/2015/10/05/florida-of-the-day-augustus-sol-invictus-the-goat-sacrificing-no-longer-pro-eugenics-fake-drawling-libertarian-party-candidate/#sthash.EQDxb8fS.dpuf
http://floridapolitics.com/archives/191642-steve-edmonds-leave-libertarian-party-run-npa-house-28
Mr. Knapp is a Libertarian candidate running as a write-in.
tk: [Disclosure: I am a Libertarian candidate for Congress from Florida too; I have never sacrificed a goat, don’t associate with white supremacists, and support neither civil war nor eugenics]
me: I thought TK was running as a write-in candidate, not on the L line. Has that changed?
Alex Vidal on FB:
Someone should be copy-pasting the LPF press release rebuke of Goat Killer into the comment section of each article covering this.
My bing news search for “florida goat” has Invictus articles from Fox News, BBC, Mother Jones, Esquire, Daily Kos, Washington Post, Newser, New York Daily News, Slate, Mediaite (126 comments so far) and Salon. Miami New Times gets points for best picture and several links back to source material so readers can research for themselves and decide for themselves instead of allowing the media clowns to decide for them.
http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/floridas-goat-blood-drinking-senate-candidate-is-really-almost-too-insane-for-florida-7954888
While spare, Knapp’s article above also gets points for covering the facts and failing to jump to conclusions.
Red Alert Politics gets the award for best title, “Not the Onion: US Senate candidate sacrificed goat, drank its blood”.
I’m not sure that we could or should move away from government-printed ballots, but political parties should have automatic ballot access and be permitted to choose their own nominees by convention, and independents should only need a notarized statement of candidacy.
Commenting to subscribe.