143. Christians, Libertarians, and Voting: The Golden Rule Test

Are you unknowingly supporting tyranny every time you cast a ballot? This provocative question lies at the heart of our latest Bad Roman podcast episode featuring Jeb Smith, a thought-provoking writer challenging conventional wisdom on voting.

Christians, libertarians, or those who identify as both, often assume our civic duty includes heading to the polls. But what if participating in elections actually contradicts our core values? Let’s explore why voting might be fundamentally at odds with both Christian teachings and libertarian principles.

The Paradox of Voting

Jeb Smith argues that voting creates an inherent contradiction for both libertarians and Christians:

“If libertarianism is a live and let live attitude... voting is of course, the opposite of that. If libertarians get to that magic 51% and force their ways on everyone else, you’re no longer allowing Democrats and Republicans to have their way.”

This highlights a key tension: how can we claim to value individual liberty while simultaneously trying to impose our will on others through the ballot box?

For Christians, a similar dilemma emerges:

“God does not impose his way on us. He gives us the chance to choose him as Lord.”

That’s consistent with scripture:

• Matthew 7:12 – “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”

• Luke 22:25–26 – “The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them… But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves.”

By voting to enact laws that align with our religious beliefs or choosing the lesser of two evils, are we not contradicting this core tenet of free will and Jesus’ call to serve rather than rule?

The Corrupting Nature of Political Power

Our discussion revealed how the very act of seeking political office often attracts individuals with troubling personality traits:

“The traits to make a successful politician are right on with what psychopaths are. There’s a large percentage of politicians and business owners… who are actually psychopaths.”

This sobering reality forces us to question whether participating in such a system aligns with our values. Are we inadvertently empowering those least suited to wield authority over others?

Reframing Our Civic Engagement

Rather than viewing voting as our primary means of effecting change, Jeb suggests a radical shift in perspective:

“One thing I won’t be doing is voting or attempting to force my way on others. Instead, I will follow the Golden Rule and treat others the way I want them to treat me.”

This approach challenges us to find more direct, personal ways of living out our values and influencing our communities. It asks us to lead by example rather than coercion.

3 Ways Christians Can Engage Without Voting

Stepping away from the ballot box doesn’t mean apathy — it can actually free us to pursue more Christlike, effective forms of engagement:

1. Invest in Relationships

• Instead of dividing over red vs. blue, break bread with neighbors across the spectrum.

• Real conversations build bridges where political shouting matches burn them.

2. Serve in Voluntary Community Initiatives

• Join or start projects that meet needs without waiting for government programs — food co-ops, mutual aid, church-led charity.

• This models the early church in Acts 2:44–45.

3. Teach and Model the Alternative

• Share resources that explain why voting contradicts both the Golden Rule and libertarian non-aggression.

• Encourage others to question whether the ballot box truly aligns with Christ’s way of peace.

For more on how the early church lived differently from the empire, see our episode on Tertullian and political disengagement and our blog post on No King but Christ.

What We Learned About Voting and Values

This episode challenges us to critically examine our assumptions about civic duty and political engagement. It asks us to consider whether our current methods of participation truly align with our deepest held beliefs.

For Christians, it prompts reflection on how we can best emulate Christ’s example of servant leadership and respect for individual choice. For libertarians, it pushes us to more fully embrace the non-aggression principle — even when it comes to the ballot box.

Ultimately, this conversation invites us all to reimagine what responsible citizenship looks like in a world where voting may do more harm than good. It challenges us to find more authentic, impactful ways of living out our values and contributing to the betterment of society.

Listen to the full episode to explore: how might stepping away from voting change your approach to civic engagement? What new opportunities for positive influence might emerge?

Let’s continue this crucial dialogue and work toward a more voluntary, compassionate society one that truly respects the dignity and autonomy of every individual.

🤝Connect with JEB SMITH:

• Jeb's Books:

  • Defending the Middle Ages: Little Known Truths About the Crusades, Inquisitions, Medieval Women, and More

  • Missing Monarchy: Correcting Misconceptions About The Middle Ages, Medieval Kingship, Democracy, And Liberty

  • The Road Goes Ever On and On : A New Perspective on J. R. R. Tolkien and Middle-earth

  • Defending Dixieland

• Fanmail and Hate mail via email: jackson18611096@gmail.com

• Jeb's Article: Is Libertarianism Consistent with Voting?

Episode Timestamps:

(0:41) Libertarianism and Voting Consistency

• “Live and let live” vs. majority rule

• Concern: Christians voting to place rulers over neighbors

(1:51) Guest Update: Jeb Smith’s Recent Work

• Defending Dixie’s Land reissued by Shotwell Publishing
  Articles with Libertarian Institute and Libertarian Christian Institute

(2:50) Libertarian Voting Paradox

• Why informed libertarians still vote

• Habit, protest voting, and misunderstandings of libertarian philosophy

(4:04) Historical Voting Patterns and Motivations

• Jeb’s past protest votes (Libertarian)

• Reflection: voting often unexamined as a social default

(5:43) Libertarian Electoral Success and Philosophical Consistency

• If Libertarians won: risk of imposing on dissenting minorities

• Tension with non-aggression and consent

(7:34) Voting as Legitimizing Corrupt Systems

• Withholding participation vs. “lesser of two evils”

• Note on turnout; argument for withdrawing support

(9:40) The Nature of Political Power and Authority

• Critique: democratic “authority” without true consent

• Coercion mechanisms: taxation, enforcement, military

(12:07) Fear and Coercion in State Power

• Fear as unifying tool of large states
  Thought experiment: local secession and central pushback

(14:37) Christian and Libertarian Approaches to Governance

• “Make the state Christian/libertarian” still relies on force

• Emphasis on consent and free will

(19:06) Democracy and Bullying

• Framing: democracy as tax-funded coercion

• Politics alters behavior; hardens attitudes

(22:23) Political Involvement and Dehumanization

• Media demonization cycles

• Immigration/ICE example raised as moral test of neighbor-love

(27:01) Disengagement from Politics

• Unplugging from news → lower stress, clearer thinking

• Better interpersonal relationships

(30:28) Voting as Participation in War

• Casting a ballot likened to joining a conflict of control

• Incompatibility with libertarian non-aggression and Jesus’ kingdom ethic

(34:10) Secularization of Christianity through Politics

• Enforcing faith via state power vs. Christ’s model of service/consent

• Biblical concern: another “king” between us and neighbor

(36:16) The Corrupting Nature of Political Power

• Campaign incentives: compromise and ambition

• Preference for servant leadership over power-seeking

(40:08) Psychopathy in Politics and Business

• Claim: politics attracts control-oriented personalities

• Risk: concentrated power amplifies harm

(42:29) The Golden Rule and Political Non-Participation

• Jeb’s stance: no voting; no forcing others

• Reported outcomes: improved relationships; reduced stress

(47:54) Additional Resources and Contact Information

• Books noted; open invite for dialogue

• Direction to further critiques of democracy

---

Related Episodes

Related Blog Post

138. The Anatomy of the Statist: Unmasking the Mindset Behind Government Support with Patrick Carroll

Ever wondered why some people cling so tightly to the idea of government, even when faced with its glaring flaws? In this episode of the Bad Roman Podcast, we dive deep into the psychology of statism with Patrick Carroll, a brilliant thinker and writer who's been challenging the status quo for years.

Carroll's insights are like a splash of cold water to the face of conventional wisdom. He doesn't just critique government supporters – he dissects their motivations with surgical precision. And trust us, what he reveals will make you question everything you thought you knew about politics and society.

The Statist's Playbook: 10 Characteristics You Need to Know

Carroll breaks down the statist mindset into 10 distinct characteristics. It's like he's giving us a field guide to spot government supporters in the wild. But here's the kicker – it's not about judging them. It's about understanding why they think the way they do, so we can have more productive conversations and maybe, just maybe, change some minds.

1. The Humanitarian: The Road to Hell is Paved with Good Intentions

You know that friend who's always talking about how we need more government programs to help the poor? That's the humanitarian statist. Their heart's in the right place, but their solution is all wrong.

Carroll nails it when he says:

"The humanitarian impulse is great. Obviously, I also care about helping people. But I think it's important when we're trying to address why someone is pro-government to wrestle with the fact that they have a really compelling reason in their mind."

Here's the thing – we all want to help people. But using government force to do it? That's like trying to perform surgery with a sledgehammer. It might get the job done, but at what cost?

2. The Egalitarian: When Equality Becomes Tyranny

Ever heard someone say, "It's not fair that some people have so much more than others"? That's the egalitarian statist talking. They see inequality as inherently unjust and think the government should level the playing field.

But as Carroll points out:

"Even if we agree that maybe there's some value in creating a certain amount of equality in society, is that something that we should be coercing?"

It's a tough pill to swallow, but sometimes the cure is worse than the disease. Forced equality often leads to less prosperity for everyone.

3. The Paternalist: Big Brother Knows Best

This one's a doozy. The paternalist statist thinks they know what's best for you better than you do. They're the ones pushing for laws to ban "dangerous" foods or regulate every aspect of your life "for your own good."

Carroll hits the nail on the head:

"It's this very kind of self-righteous attitude of 'I know best, or you know, the government, us and our experts know best and don't worry, we're just going to take care of you.'"

Newsflash: Adults don't need a nanny state. We're capable of making our own decisions, thank you very much.

4. The Special Interest Group Member: Looking Out for Number One

This statist is all about using government power to benefit their group. Whether it's farmers lobbying for subsidies or corporations pushing for regulations that crush their competition, it's all about gaming the system.

Carroll doesn't pull any punches:

"It’s like you're telling me that you're willing to forcibly coerce other people purely so that you can financially benefit. How is that different from a thief going up to a guy in the street and holding a gun and saying, give me your wallet?"

Ouch. But he's not wrong. Using government force to line your own pockets is theft with extra steps.

5. The Risk Mitigator: Safety at Any Cost

Gun control advocates often fall into this category. They're so focused on reducing risk that they're willing to sacrifice freedom in the process.

Carroll offers a brilliant reframe:

"We live in a dangerous world, and that sucks. And definitely, I believe in systems like insurance to mitigate risk. I think mitigating risk is important. But we shouldn't be coercing people into mitigating risks."

Safety is important, but at what point does the cure become worse than the disease?

6. The Utilitarian: The Greatest Good for the Greatest Number?

This statist believes in maximizing social welfare through government intervention. They talk about "market failures" and think the state can fix them.

Carroll's skepticism is spot-on:

"I really question whether we can do any objective kind of social welfare calculations... And so I'm very skeptical of this idea that we can measure social welfare, let alone have the government come in and optimize it."

Even if you could measure social welfare, does that justify using force to achieve it?

7. The Theocrat: Legislating Morality, Putting more “Christians” in Office

Some statists, especially in religious circles, believe it's their duty to use government power to enforce moral or religious values.

Carroll offers a powerful counterargument:

"Is it really Christian to force morality on people? I totally understand the drive, but I would encourage Christians to really study the Bible and look at this."

Forcing virtue at gunpoint isn't virtuous at all.

8. The Resigned Follower: It's Just the Way Things Are

This statist has given up. They might agree with libertarian principles in theory, but they think a voluntary society is impossible.

Carroll's response is inspiring:

"I don't share that pessimism... I think we just need to look at history to have faith in the market."

Just because something hasn't been done yet doesn't mean it's impossible.

9. The Megalomaniac: Power for Power's Sake

Some people just love having power over others. It's a sad reality, but these statists exist.

Carroll's advice is simple:

"I think we just need to gang up on those people and tell them no, like, sorry, you're not going to get your way and you're not going to use us as pawns."

No elaboration needed. Power-hungry individuals have no place in a free society.

10. The Intolerant: The Heart of Statism

This is the core of the statist mentality. All the other characteristics boil down to this:

"At the end of the day, the conclusion is, I am going to be intolerant of you living your life as you see fit. I'm going to force you to comply with my value system and my personal beliefs. And that is something that every statist shares by definition."

It's a harsh truth, but an important one. Statism, at its core, is about forcing others to live according to your values. It's not about left vs. right. It's about whether you're willing to use force to make others live the way you think they should.

What We Learned About the Statist Mindset

This episode is a wake-up call. It challenges us to examine our own beliefs about government and ask some tough questions:

• Are we truly tolerant if we support using force to make others live as we think they should?

• Can we achieve our goals of helping others and creating a better society without resorting to government coercion?

• Are we willing to apply the same moral standards to government actions that we apply to individuals?

The answers might make you uncomfortable. But that discomfort is the first step towards a more consistent and ethical worldview.

Ready to have your mind blown? Listen to the full episode and prepare to see the world in a whole new light. And remember – questioning the status quo isn't just rebellious. It's necessary for a free and just society.

🤝Connect with Patrick:

• Blog

• Facebook Page

• Twitter (X), 

• The Prudent Navigator (website/blog)

• Read Patrick’s Mises Institute Articles

• Read or Listen to The Anatomy of a Statist article

Episode Timestamps:

(0:22) Patrick Carroll returns to discuss "The Anatomy of the Statist"

• Exploration of the Statist mentality and its challenges

• Previous appearances on episodes 16 and 55

• Episode 16: If You Vote You Can’t Complain

• Episode 55: Is Taxation Slavery?

(0:58) Patrick's recent work and philosophical journey

• Managing editor at Foundation for Economic Education

• Focus on economics, policy, and libertarian philosophy

• Influence of thinkers like Nietzsche, Rothbard, and classical liberals

(4:17) Discussion on Patrick's writing style and approach

• Larken Rose on the Bad Roman

• Episode 83: The Cult of Statism 

• Episode 91: Breaking Down the Jones Plantation

• Episode 134: Immigration and Christian Values: Challenging the Border Fetish Brigade

• Emphasis on direct, matter-of-fact communication

• Importance of consistency in thinking and living out principles

(5:47) The appeal of libertarian philosophy

• Internal consistency and principled approach

• Rejection of exceptions to moral principles

(7:45) Breaking the framing of political conversations

• Libertarianism as a refreshing alternative to left-right dichotomy

• Questioning cultural assumptions about government

(10:37) The Anatomy of the Statist: 10 characteristics

• Humanitarian impulse and its relation to statism

• Egalitarian motivations for government intervention

(17:47) The utilitarian perspective on government

• Market failure arguments and social welfare calculations

• Skepticism towards government optimization of social welfare

(23:17) The theocrat and Christian involvement in politics

• Critique of using government to enforce Christian morality

• Biblical perspective on non-interference and servant leadership

(31:41) The risk mitigator and government regulation

• Gun control as an example of risk mitigation through legislation

• Alternative approaches to risk management without coercion

(53:57) The megalomaniac and power dynamics of government

• Addressing those who seek power for its own sake

• Importance of resisting authoritarian tendencies

(56:24) The heart of the statist: intolerance

• Common thread of compelling others to live by one's values

• Contrast with libertarian principles of live and let live

(59:52) Taxation as theft: beyond metaphor

• Clarifying the libertarian position on taxation

• Ethical implications of equating taxation with common theft

(1:03:43) Free market principles and conservative inconsistencies

• Critique of tariffs and government regulation

• Importance of genuine free market understanding

(1:05:31) Conclusion and resources

---

Related Episodes

Related Blog Post