Friday, May 6, 2016

Socialism Doesn't Care (About Us)

You know what bugs me about socialism (communist, welfare state, "democratic", or otherwise)?

It's very simple. Socialism forces me to provide for every other person and family as if they are as important as my family, (and does it by gunpoint and in a way that is contrary to the very laws that built this world).

News flash, (and some people may think I'm heartless for saying this...) -- they're not.

As a provider, not every person or other family is as important as my family is to me. It doesn't matter how much they may be in need, how much more I may or may not have than them, how much of a difference I can make in their life, how bad of a hand they've been dealt in this life, how much they (or their ancestors many generations ago) have been abused / repressed / taken advantage of by the misuse of other's agency, how much they think they "deserve" my help, how much God values them, or how great the worth of their soul is, they don't rank at the top of the people I am to provide for. Plain as that. (Now, on the flip side, your family is more important to you than my family is, as it should be).

Now don't get me wrong, I am my brother's keeper, I am to love my neighbor as myself, and I do have a moral obligation to heal the sick, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, mourn with those that mourn, and comfort those that stand in need of comfort. BUT, no where does our Lord say that I have to clothe / heal / feed / mourn / comfort _EVERY_ person on the planet (or even in the States) at the same time, let alone without my consent.

The Lord command us to give, but He also sets limits. He has told us that we have limited time, money, and other resources, and that we must serve in "wisdom and order", or else we run the risk of neglecting that which is most important in our lives -- the hungry / naked / mourning / uncomfortable within the walls of our own home. The Lord has told us that those are the ones first and foremost that we are to serve. If we have additional resources after attending to their needs and (reasonable) wants, then the Lord expects us to give to those who are in need (in order by proximity - first to extended family, church members, those the community, world, etc.). He allows me to use my judgment and agency to a determine the needs of my family vs everyone else.

This is where socialism (welfare state / communism / etc) falls flat. No matter what you may hear, it doesn't care about my family. It claims to care about my family as part of a larger "utopian society", but doesn't care about them individually. It doesn't see them as individuals with individual needs, wants, and abilities. It wants to treat them all the same. It wants to guarantee them an equal outcome with everyone else (regardless of personal industry and agency), if we will just go along with their master plan, (where have I heard that before? *cough* *cough* SATAN *cough* ).

How can we attempt to build the foundation of a Heaven on earth if we do so using materials made of lies and disobedience to His basic laws and commandments?  Remember the old song from primary - "The Wise Man and the Foolish Man"?  Any society built upon unrightousness, (no matter how noble the intent) will be washed away.  Ezra Taft Benson destroys the whole premise of socialism with one argument:
Suppose pioneer "A" wants another horse for his wagon, He doesn’t have the money to buy one, but since pioneer "B" has an extra horse, he decides that he is entitled to share in his neighbor’s good fortune, Is he entitled to take his neighbor’s horse? Obviously not! If his neighbor wishes to give it or lend it, that is another question. But so long as pioneer "B" wishes to keep his property, pioneer "A" has no just claim to it.

If "A" has no proper power to take "B’s" property, can he delegate any such power to the sheriff? No. Even if everyone in the community desires that "B" give his extra horse to "A", they have no right individually or collectively to force him to do it. They cannot delegate a power they themselves do not have. This important principle was clearly understood and explained by John Locke nearly 300 years ago:
“For nobody can transfer to another more power than he has in himself, and nobody has an absolute arbitrary power over himself, or over any other, to destroy his own life, or take away the life of property of another.” (Two Treatises of Civil Government, II, 135; P.P.N.S. p. 93)
And what about "Democratic Socialism" (i.e. the "New Deal" and the like) that everyone in American History class was taught to believe was the only way America could recooperated from the financial woes in the early part of the 19th century? We often hear of the many programs and initiatives that gave us the backbone of industry and infrastructure that allowed our country and economy to become the powerhouse that made it famous.  There is an old adage says "the best place to hide a lie is between two truths".  There are definitely many good things that were brought about by those who call themselves "Democratic socialists", any many of them fall in line with the ideas the founding father's had for proper role of government and the appropriate use of taxes and public funds, but maybe the "payload" of some these destructive philosophies and ideas are finally showing themselves today. Maybe this "poisoning by degrees" was part of the plan all along:
"You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you’ll fall like overripe fruit into our hands." -- Nikita Khrushchev
There are some that say it really isn't socialism if the programs and laws are put in place by a democratic process or by elected government leaders.

Penn Jillette, (of Penn & Teller fame), puts it this way:
It’s amazing to me how many people think that voting to have the government give poor people money is compassion. Helping poor and suffering people is compassion. Voting for our government to use guns to give money to help poor and suffering people is immoral self-righteous bullying laziness.

People need to be fed, medicated, educated, clothed, and sheltered, and if we’re compassionate we’ll help them, but you get no moral credit for forcing other people to do what you think is right. There is great joy in helping people, but no joy in doing it at gunpoint.
P.J. O'Rourqe adds:
"There is no virtue in compulsory government charity. And no virtue in advocating it. A politician who commends himself as “caring” and “sensitive” because he wants to expand the government’s charitable programs is merely saying that he’s willing to try to do good with other people’s money. Who isn’t? A voter who takes pride in supporting such programs is telling us that he’ll do good with his own money—if a gun is held to his head.”
Another thing socialism gets rid of is the business of mercy, meekness, humility, justice, and gratitude. Gone are the lessons learned of a salvational figure who comes to the aid of those who cannot meet the necessities of life on their own, and require a mediator to relinquish actual pain and suffering. Gone are the feelings of gratitude towards someone who has brought over a box of their own food, or written a check from their own back account that is the fruit of their own personal labor, or their own time and talents to work or repair or administer in ways that the needy themselves couldn't accomplish. Gone is the meekness and humility needed to go to meet with individuals, hat in hand, month after month, to plead for help to provide when they themselves are unable, replaced with forms to fill out, lines to stand in, and meeting with government workers who have no personal "skin in the game" because they themselves will not be giving of their own personal time/funds. Gone is the knowledge that if you don't earn it yourself then there is no guarantee that you're going to get it.

Now, there are some that easily fall for this line:
  • You've got your politicians, who like to promise a "chicken in every pot", healthcare insurance available to all (without fixing the real problem), or any other promise they can make with other people's money to get elected and force their ideology on everyone.
  • You've got your uninformed masses that think it looks good on paper, (or that don't even think it's something that's a problem in this country...), but haven't learned from the past, haven't opened their eyes to what is going on around them, or haven't taken the time to look at the "big picture" and are doomed to repeat the mistakes that toppled massive civilizations like the Roman empire.
  • You've got those who never have enough or who aren't satisfied living within their means and rather than developing meekness and gratitude are always looking for a way to get more for less effort.
  • You've got the actual sick, hungry, naked, and poor who live in a nation that has a long tradition of destabilizing the family, (that used to teach individual citizens good morals and ethics in the home who would grow up to give and administer to those in need of their own volition), and now rely more and more heavily on the elected officials mentioned above taking from the American populous by gunpoint to meet their basic needs, (and at this point don't know of any other system by which they can survive, and so are "locked in").
  • You've got those who are a slave to fear (who either freeze in anxiety / panic or over-mobilize and go all "control freak"), that rather than repress it with faith they turn to empty promises from the "arm of the flesh".
  • You've got those who's great-grandfather almost lost the farm, or the family who couldn't have survived without government assistance, (and didn't see any other way out), so they are blind to the big picture.
  • Lastly, there are those whose sense of compassion and awareness of suffering (or lack of emotional separation/control) is so heavy to bear that the only relief they can find is by championing social causes or devoting their own personal resources to relieve every burden they notice, (while more that likely neglecting their own lives, spiritual progression and families).

So, when we have a choice to use our voice and our vote, it's time to undo the slippery road we find ourselves on as a nation. There will be a lot of foolish traditions that need to be to toppled that have been gradually built up and erected over the years to slowly rob us of our liberties, and great burdens to bear to care for those who have depended on an unsustainable and unlawful system for their support that was always in a state of eventual collapse, but there is no other way.

My family is more important than yours, (and visa versa), and the only way I can care for it the way God intended is to root out any system that does not abide by the same eternal laws the universe itself was built on.

See Also:

No comments: