Libertarian Distortions of the Gospel

https://www.lewrockwell.com/political-theatre/woman-arrested-at-bofa-for-no-mask/

I do not endorse Lew Rockwell's website. I visit it just to see what's being said in those circles. On occasion there's some foreign policy insight but generally speaking the Libertarianism of the site is contrary to New Testament doctrine and ethics.

And yet, there are many Christians taken in by their ethos and values. It's a bit of strange brew – a lot of Traditionalist Catholicism, Bircher-types, sometimes beyond-the-pale conspiracy stuff, mixed with Neo-Confederatism and a lot of other things. Sometimes there's something interesting but often it's more of an occasion to shake one's head.

The Christian angle was particularly troubling in this case. As expected the hyper-individualistic, self-and-rights oriented Lew Rockwell folks are virulently opposed to any measure which might halt the spread of Covid-19. In fact during the latter part of the Trump term and with the advent of Covid-19 the site has really gone off the rails. They're not the only ones. I can list numerous sites that I don't even bother with anymore. Between Trump and Covid they lost all credibility and in some cases even a passing interest on my part.

But this story angered me. This completely selfish, delusional, and self-absorbed woman was repeatedly warned and asked to leave. There are other banking options she could have chosen. She just didn't want to. The cop was actually quite patient with her.

The Libertarian perspective on this makes no sense. From their standpoint it's a private business and thus they have the 'right' to make their own rules and serve or turn away anyone they want. In this case the Libertarians want to force private businesses to serve them – the very thing that angers them when the government insists on enforcing civil rights. So which is it?

Additionally, can stores force someone to leave for smoking? For not wearing a shirt or shoes? So why then is the mask question any different?

It's a case of Libertarianism being blinded by its own political agenda. In terms of the present system, the business was completely within its rights to ask the woman to leave. In fact, given the Libertarian attitude about guns, I would go further and suggest (based on their own flawed ethic) the business owners would have every right to shoot the person if they refused to leave. Was it not a case of defiant trespass? She wasn't arrested for refusing to wear a mask. She was arrested for refusing to leave.

None of this has anything to do with New Testament Christianity. You can only imagine how horrified I was to see the author (re-posted by Rockwell himself) set this whole debacle up as some kind of case of Christian persecution! It most certainly is not!

Again, Christians should have been the first ones ready and willing to wear a mask – not out of concern that they would get sick (which is nevertheless valid) but out of concern for others. No Christian would want to harm someone else and risk passing on a virus that could permanently harm someone or kill them. Wearing a mask is nothing. It's a minor inconvenience and it's not sin. The Christians that have refused and protested have no excuse. They are in direct violation of Romans 13 and various other apostolic imperatives.

This crisis in thought, this epistemological and moral chaos has been further amplified by Christian confusion regarding Western law, Classical Liberalism, and a host of narratives surrounding the United States. These are errors and often heresies that supplant New Testament ethics and have confused the ideologies and laws of Babel with the explicit commands of Zion.

This post by Rockwell is tragic as it celebrates sin, sows confusion and given his large readership it will help to perpetuate the chaos and error that presently reigns in Christian circles. Libertarianism is not Christian. It cannot be. Christians should not support Ron Paul. It is fundamentally at odds with the ethics and outlook of the New Testament. The Christian appropriation of this ideology is an attempt to baptize Enlightenment values and the sinful dog-eat-dog animal-like instincts of fallen man. It is an idolatry of mammon and the self and as such (as seen in the case of the twisting, spin, and perversion of the bank story) it runs the risk of being ethically dangerous.