Thursday, July 17, 2014

Bojidar Marinov on the Immigration "Crisis"

Immigration and The Sabbath (Session 1) by Bojidar Marinov
July 12th, 2014 · Download MP3 - This is the first lecture in a series of 3 lectures that Bojidar Marinov gave at Church Of The King about the recent border immigration issue in America.

History of the Immigration Laws in the U.S. and the West (Session 2) by Bojidar Marinov
July 12th, 2014 · Download MP3 - This is the second lecture in a series of 3 lectures that Bojidar Marinov gave at Church Of The King about the recent border immigration issue in America.

Logical and Theological Analysis of the Anti-Immigration Ideology of Modern Conservatives (Session 3) by Bojidar Marinov
July 12th, 2014 · Download MP3 - This is the third lecture in a series of 3 lectures that Bojidar Marinov gave at Church Of The King about the recent border immigration issue in America.

Immigration Conference Q&A by Bojidar Marinov
July 12th, 2014 · Download MP3 - This is the Q&A session following a series of 3 lectures that Bojidar Marinov gave at Church Of The King about the recent border immigration issue in America.


Sermons - Radio Spots - Church of the King - Faith of our Fathers

Thursday, July 10, 2014

Pacifism, Preterism and the Pentagon

I mentioned Harvard Professor Steven Pinker a couple of years ago. Pinker says the world is getting less violent. That comes as a surprise to most people, especially those who listen to the government-approved "Mainstream Media." We've all been trained -- especially in evangelical churches -- to believe that the world is getting worse and worse (not "better and better").

But Pinker is right. He has the numbers.
…the number of war battlefield deaths has dropped by a factor of 1,000, falling from 500 per 100,000 in prehistoric times, to 60-70 in the 19th and 20th century (notwithstanding epic wars) to… less than one such death per 300,000 now in the 21st. Genocide deaths have dropped by well over a factor of 1000 from 1942 to 2008.
He is wrong about the cause. Pinker says peace is caused by atheism ("secularism," "rationalism).

The real cause is The Great Commission and the spread of the religion of "The Prince of Peace" from 12 weak-kneed disciples to over a billion people around the world. The angels told the Christmas shepherds that the newborn Messiah was bringing "Peace on Earth."

The Bible commands us to beat our "swords into plowshares." Christians teach forgiveness and love of enemies. Imperfectly, granted. But cumulatively, the result is spectacular: nothing less than Western Civilization itself.

"Pacifism" (that is, taking the Prince of Peace "literally") is the foundation of civilization. Governments ignore the Prince of Peace, but today most people practice patience and forgiveness in their daily lives (family, business) rather than follow the politicians in beating the drums of war and bombing their enemies "back to the stone age."

The errant eschatology known as "Dispensational Premillennialism" has been predicting the End of The World for decades, and increasingly since 1948 (the humanistic formation of the non-Messianic political state of Israel). The Rapture eschatology is now nearly completely discredited. "Futurism" is rapidly being replaced by "Preterism." We should not be hoping for Armageddon as the doorway to world peace. Premillennialism is a theology of war succeeded by a police state.

The Christian must proclaim: "We Don't Need War."

Combine that with Randolph Bourne's observation that "War is the health of the State," and you have a paradigm-shifting combination that leads to peace and radically smaller government.

Here's a new article that expands upon that idea:

Ron Paul, Rand Paul Defy What Keeps Big Government Big

This is a tremendous article. Click that link and read it now.

A holistic Christian worldview will eventually discard "premillennialism" and the Pentagon and embrace both "postmillennialism" and "swords into plowshares."

Sunday, June 15, 2014

Pacifism and Civilization

Imagine you and I are playing billiards.

I whup ya.

You get angry.

In the heat of passion, you pick up a cue stick and announce your intention to skewer my heart. Everyone gasps in horror, as "the reasonable man" apprehends an imminent threat of bodily harm. As you aim the stick at my chest, I grab the stainless steel lid from a nearby garbage can, and use it as a shield. You thrust the cue at me, hitting my lid-shield, and your cue splinters into toothpicks. I am unharmed.

This is "self-defense."

No pacifist I've ever met is against "self-defense."


Now imagine your horror as I pick up the garbage can lid and stuff it into your mouth till you look like a Ubangi savage.

Is this "self-defense?"

No, I am no longer defending myself. I am taking vengeance. Your attack is over.

Pacifists oppose what is often loosely called "self-defense."

Most of what is called "self-defense" is a really vengeance for a previous attack, or is aggression intended to "deter" some hypothetical future attack.

Now imagine the opposite case. You whup me, I get angry, and I take the garbage can lid and whack your cue into splinters. We're looking at the same result -- your cue is broken by my shield -- but in one case the contact between your cue and my shield is "self-defense," but in the second case it is an offense, a tort and a crime, and I owe you a new cue stick.

My behavior is "uncivilized."

Jesus commands His followers to be "pacifists."

That doesn't rule out fleeing or the use of shields, but it does rule out vengeance, revolution (such as the one that began on July 4, 1776)  and "national defense."
Our lives -- and civilization -- will not be adversely affected by China taking down the Stars and Stripes and running the Chinese flag up every flagpole in America. If China takes over the U.S., we'll hardly notice. It isn't worth killing millions of Chinese people to prevent. Civilization will be protected and advanced by missionaries, not the Marines.

If we follow the pacifist Christ, we can have "a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence." We have no feeling of security, because we are no longer a Christian nation.

“Pacifism” as taught by Christ is the foundation of civilization.

Ancient empires were violent to the core.
Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome.
It is only with the Advent of Christ that governments began to be civilized (eventually to be eliminated).

Pacifism leads to anarcho-capitalism.

Biblical laws against murder and vengeance, and commands to forgive, love enemies, be patient, and serve enemies by laboring for their personal benefit, are at the heart of what we call "western civilization."
Acts of love practiced by billions of people are more important than acts of "government" committed by hundreds of people. In the U.S., these people are the source of crime, as they prohibit public schools from teaching students that God says "Thou shalt not kill." Their power is corrupting, not only of themselves, but of all of us. Those people and their "mainstream media" want to direct our focus to their actions, their laws, their decrees, their judicial opinions, their regulations, their inspectors, agents, officers, and soldiers, and we are instructed to view them as the guardians of civilization -- "the thin blue line" -- but they are not. Civilized behavior is pacifist behavior.

Someday I'll rewrite this page and highlight the significance of pacifist behavior vs. the warlike behavior of the State. It is the essential lesson of history.

It is pacifism that nurtures and protects civilization.





Saturday, May 31, 2014

Passport Through Darkness

Here is an extraordinary interview by Janet Parshall with an extraordinary woman, Kimberly Smith:

In the Market with Janet Parshall - Listen

The solution to war, genocide, human trafficking, and terrorism, in far-away places like Darfur, is not the U.S. military, despite what you may have heard the last few days over Memorial Day weekend.

The answer is Christian missionaries.

The Spirit of God gives ordinary people far more courage than any boot-camp created by the atheistic Pentagon. Missionaries are willing to face unarmed the entire spectrum of corrupt government thugs, armies, international terrorists, and organized crime -- without infantry or "air support."

The U.S. Federal Government -- a pawn of banks and global corporations -- is more interested in protecting oil reserves in the Sudan than the lives of children.

Discussion of Darfur begins 30 minutes or so into the interview, suggesting to me that the nurturing of indigenous missionaries in uncivilized lands is far more important than raising the U.S. flag over Iwo Jima.

Notice also how Dr. Milton R Smith exercises patriarchal headship over his submissive wife using principles he doubtless learned from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.

The foreign policy implications of this interview are staggering. And if the theory of Six Degrees of Separation is true, there is a child in your neighborhood whose life has been fractured by the darkness in the African continent, probably because the U.S. government placed obstacles in the way of Christian missionaries.

The U.S. is no longer a City upon a Hill. Government officials have lost the vision of James Madison, "Father of the Constitution," who, in one of his most famous works, said legislators should vote against any legislation if
the policy of the bill is adverse to the diffusion of the light of Christianity. The first wish of those who enjoy this precious gift, ought to be that it may be imparted to the whole race of mankind. Compare the number of those who have as yet received it with the number still remaining under the dominion of false Religions; and how small is the former! Does the policy of the Bill tend to lessen the disproportion? No; it at once discourages those who are strangers to the light of (revelation) from coming into the Region of it; and countenances, by example the nations who continue in darkness, in shutting out those who might convey it to them. Instead of levelling as far as possible, every obstacle to the victorious progress of truth, the Bill with an ignoble and unchristian timidity would circumscribe it, with a wall of defence, against the encroachments of error.
The Gospel changes lives and brings "Liberty -- under God." Christian missionaries plant the seeds of civilization and see them to harvest.

Please visit the Make Way Partners website for more information, or visit Kimberly's blog.

Thursday, May 29, 2014

In God We Trust?

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals (just below the Supreme Court of the U.S.) has just ruled that "In God We Trust" is OK on our Mammon.

http://www.adfmedia.org/files/US-NewdowDecision.pdf

The Alliance Defending Freedom is pleased.

http://www.alliancedefendingfreedom.org/News/PRDetail/9110

I'm not.

The Court followed numerous previous Federal District Courts and Appellate Courts which held that the word "GOD" cannot possibly offend atheists because the word is "secular" and "patriotic" and has "no theological . . . impact." In other words, atheists, chill out; its just a bunch of people taking the Lord's Name in vain.

http://vftonline.org/TestOath/10help_us.htm

The Second Circuit also followed a number of Supreme Court Justices who have noted that our nation's God-language is “a form [of] ‘ceremonial deism,’ protected from Establishment Clause scrutiny chiefly because [it has] lost through rote repetition any significant religious content."

“Ceremonial Deism?”

Back in 1844, when the word "God" had theological and religious meaning, and when the Supreme Court acknowledged that America was a Christian, rather than a "secular" (atheistic) nation, the Supreme Court declared that "deism" was a form of "infidelity" (which, if you went to government schools, means "faithlessness" [from the Latin fides, faith]). Back then, the Court said that government promotion of deism "is not to be presumed to exist in a Christian country."

Monday, May 26, 2014

In Praise of Muhammad Ali on "Memorial Day"

“I was in prison and you came to Me.”
Matthew 25:36



In 1892 the Supreme Court of the United States unambiguously declared that America was "a Christian nation." That decision was thrown out on its ear a few decades later as the 20th century saw the United States become a "secular" nation.

The 1892 case, Holy Trinity Church vs. United States, involved a church which hired a pastor from Great Britain, but was told by an officious immigration bureaucrat that the hiring violated a federal law which, the Court pointed out, was actually designed to prohibit importation of boatloads of Chinese to work on U.S. railroads.

The 20th century case involved a Canadian who wanted to teach at the Yale Divinity School, clearly parallel to the Holy Trinity case. But the Canadian was a Christian who followed the example of the Apostles, who said "We must obey God rather than man." The Canadian respondent, Douglas Clyde Macintosh, refused to promise to bear arms on behalf of the U.S. government if he thought the war was unjust. The Supreme Court ruled that Macintosh could not become a naturalized American citizen because his allegiance to God transcended the allegiance he was willing to give to the U.S. government. The Court said he must render "unqualified allegiance" to the government.

"Unqualified" means you cannot say, "Sure, I'll obey government laws . . . unless they require me to disobey God."

Any government that puts its own laws ahead of God's Law is a government that thinks it  is  God.

Cassius Clay converted to Islam and as Muhammad Ali said he would not fight in a "Christian war." Until the United States Supreme Court unanimously overturned the decision, Ali lost his right to work and faced 5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. ($70,979.64 in 2014 dollars)

The Vietnam War was not a "Christian war." No war in the history of the United States can justly be called a "Christian War."

Not even "the good war," World War II. Although he promised to keep us out of foreign wars, Roosevelt, led by Communists in the White House, took the United States into war in order to defeat the forces of anti-communism. In Eastern Europe and the Far East, atheistic communists were the clear winners of World War II and the beneficiaries of the foreign policy of the atheistic ("secular") United States.

Since I was born (post-WWII), the government of the United States has killed, crippled, or made homeless tens of millions of innocent non-combatant civilians. But why blame "the government?" The killing and destruction of trillions of dollars of property was committed largely by church-going "Christians."


No. Any Christian who willingly kills or dies for an atheistic government should be excommunicated. Better to be in prison with "the least of these" than to kill "the least of these" in an unChristian war. Better to be in prison for 5 years than leave your wife a permanent widow and your children fatherless. The fact that churches don't excommunicate soldiers explains why most Christians lack the discernment and knowledge of the facts to make the right decision. Church-goers are not taught to put God ahead of government, and peace ahead of the military-industrial complex.



In a letter to Fran├žois Jean de Beauvoir, Marquis de Chastellux, April/May, 1788, George Washington wrote:
for the sake of humanity it is devoutly to be wished, that the manly employment of agriculture and the humanizing benefits of commerce, would supersede the waste of war and the rage of conquest; that the swords might be turned into plough-shares, the spears into pruning hooks, and, as the Scripture expresses it, "the nations learn war no more." 
 "The Father of his Country" was not 100% consistent with the teachings of Scripture. But he would be appalled at what his country has become. We must not only "learn war no more," we must study peace.

George Washington Coaching - Homeschooling for Adults

Thursday, May 08, 2014

The Myth of "The Rule of Law"

Tom Woods recently interviewed Professor John Hasnas of Georgetown University on the subject of The Myth of the Rule of Law.

Hasnas says the rule of law is a myth perpetrated by governments to make their populations more compliant.

Read his articles "The Myth of the Rule of Law," "The Depoliticization of Law," and "The Obviousness of Anarchy."

Good excuse to collect some of my own related webpages:

The Rule of Law

Why Rush Limbaugh's Brother is Wrong About the "Rule of Law"

Why Neal Boortz is Wrong About the "Rule of Law"

IRS and the Rule of Law

Tobacco and the Rule of Law

Monday, March 31, 2014

Entrepreneurs Beat Regulators

Michael Lewis has written a book entitled Flash Boys which exposes the shady world of "Dark Pools" which capitalize on inefficiencies in market trading down to the level of milliseconds -- where a stock can experience about 500 quote changes and about 150 trades in the time it takes a single pixel on a high-end TV to change color, or one beat of a tsetse fly's wings. Large stock trading institutions could be ripping off smaller traders to the tune of $160 million a day,  Lewis says in an adaptation of his book in the New York Times Magazine.

If you think government regulators can compete with high-speed Wall St. sharks, fuggitaboutit. International Business Times reports,
the regulators don’t seem prepared to handle or to even understand the nature of the risk – “it’s over their heads,” says one former bank executive. “They have no idea what is really happening.”
Once a bureaucrat gets sharp enough to figure out what's going on, the regulator knows there's more money to be made in the market than in civil service.

Lewis tells the amazing story of how a geeky entrepreneur with an ethical sense of fairness (Brad Katsuyama) figures out how the big boys are trading, and actually creates his own stock exchange, which now competes with the majors, saving smaller traders billions of dollars. 

The Free Market regulates itself better than the government does.

Don't ask me for stock tips. I'm willing to admit I don't know what I'm talking about. The problem is, government regulators and politicians are not.


Thursday, February 27, 2014

Jeffrey Tucker: DO's and DON'Ts for Talking Liberty

Our lives are great when we make them so, not because a bureaucrat has somehow intervened to improve our lot. The myth that government is somehow supporting or sustaining civilization is an embedded part of our civic culture, but it is a myth easily refuted by daily experience. Monitoring what we do day-to-day, we discover that it is actually private enterprise that we depend on for all the comforts and excitements of life.
This is an inspiring realization. The notion that government is necessary is a very negative commentary on the capacity of people to manage their own affairs. Once you see the anarchy all around us, you realize that humanity is bursting with creativity, energy, the desire to get along, the impulse to fix problems, and the passion to value others and be valued ourselves. Government has only one power in the end, and that is the power to stall and thwart this constructive process with force. If by doing so it prohibits peaceful behavior, it normally diminishes the quality of life for all of us.

Jeffrey Tucker: Do's and Don'ts for Talking Liberty, p.19

LIBERTY.ME

Thursday, December 05, 2013

Chuck Slay

My Brother-in-law Chuck Slay has died. I'll update this post with a eulogy. Please pray for my sister Amy.

Sunday, December 01, 2013

Robert W. Welch, Jr. (1899-1985)

Robert Henry Winborne Welch Jr. was born on this day, December 1, 1899.

He was home-schooled until he enrolled in high school at the age of ten and was admitted to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill at the age of twelve.

Welch made a fortune in the candy business, making caramel lollipops, renamed Sugar Daddies, and he developed other well-known candies such as Sugar Babies, Junior Mints, and Pom Poms. Welch retired a wealthy man in 1956.

Welch's credo was, "Less government, more responsibility, and --with God's help -- a better world." Will Grigg has said this about Welch [my hyperlinks]:

Unlike the reflexively bellicose people who call themselves Conservatives today, Mr. Welch was never a militarist; in one commencement address he gave in the mid-1950s he pointed out that there was no reason why the American people and the people of the USSR would consider themselves enemies if it weren't for the behavior of the governments presuming to rule them. In matters of social policy, Welch opposed abortion, euthanasia, and infanticide, like most conservatives, but also opposed the death penalty (as do I) and condemned torture. He was not preoccupied by the supposed threat of immigration, and didn't believe in enlisting the government in crusades to purify people's moral behavior through the righteous application of coercion. In a remarkable speech he gave in 1979 -- when most conservatives were worried about the Soviets -- Welch predicted that the U.S. would become universally hated for the government's practice of "imperialism by the dollar, as a substitute for the sword."


If Robert Welch were around today, the Fox-aligned Right would consider him a liberal.

Welch founded the John Birch Society in 1958. In a speech he gave at the founding of the JBS, Grigg says "Welch described pious Muslims as allies in the struggle against the lawless state."

Friday, November 29, 2013

Death Panel Results

My mother's "Death Panel" met recently, and I received the results this morning.

Medicare will no longer be paying for her feeding tube pump, the daily disposable feeding tube bags, and the space-age formula that's been keeping my mom alive since her home was destroyed by a tornado.

No, I don't know why Medicare has been paying for this for all these months, and why they've decided in their infinite wisdom and compassion to now terminate their coverage. Trying to make rational sense of government decrees is often futile. It would be too easy for me to make all kinds of conspiratorial speculations. My sister is going to drive up to the Big City on Monday and see what's up.

The cost of the little plastic bags that hold the formula is something like $500 a month. The liquid food is also a bit more expensive than a Happy Meal at McD's, though I can't say for sure, as it's been a long time since I've eaten out. I'm grateful that you've been paying for all this through your taxes. Caring for her is my 24/7 job, and I'm working in my spare time to create an income-generating enterprise that will pay the bills by working at home.

If you would like to make a generous, year-end, tax-deductible donation to the non-profit, tax-exempt educational organization that might pay me enough to cover these costs, it would be most appreciated. Currently, generous donations to Vine & Fig Tree are paying the rent for storage of Vine & Fig Tree's library and office equipment, and my mother lives in a spare room. Yesterday was only the most recent of a long series of days of thanksgiving for the generosity of many.

If you have questions or suggestions, feel free to leave a comment below. I'll update this post when I learn something new.

Thank you very much.

Vine & Fig Tree Home Page

Thursday, October 03, 2013

George Washington and Theocracy in 1789

On this day in 1789, President George Washington violated the yet-undreamed of "separation of church and state" by leading the nation in a day of national prayer and thanksgiving for the new Constitution.

The modern myth of "separation of church and state" really means a separation of God and government. Not a single person alive in 1789 imagined that the new federal Constitution created a "secular" government, that is, a government that believed it could ignore God with impunity, rather than a government "Under God."

Read about George Washington's promotion of the True Religion here:

Government-Sponsored Prayer and Thanksgiving to the True God






Sunday, September 29, 2013

Mises' 132nd Birthday

Once again, as George Reisman reminds us, September 29, 2013 is the 132nd Birthday of Ludwig von Mises. I always enjoy reading Reisman’s tribute to Mises on the occasion of his 100th birthday.

Reisman says "Mises is important because his teachings are necessary to the preservation of material civilization," which depends upon the division of labor.

Reisman points out how the division of labor operates under the "invisible hand" of Divine Providence (though Reisman doesn't use those terms). Under the division of labor, every single person has a distinct, specialized role to play in the economy. One man programs a computer, another man sweeps the floor at night, goes to school during the day, and hopes someday to invent an even faster computer. Every member of the body has a function, and everyone plans out his own life, adjusting his plans in harmony with the plans of others.
Economic planning, von Mises showed, requires the cooperation of all who participate in the economic system. It can exist only under capitalism, where, every day, businessmen plan on the basis of calculations of profit and loss; workers, on the basis of wages; and consumers, on the basis of the prices of consumers’ goods
Socialism makes economic calculation, economic coordination, and economic planning impossible, and therefore results in chaos.
The failure of socialism, he showed, results from the fact that it represents not economic planning, but the destruction of economic planning, which exists only under capitalism and the price system.
"The Government" creates chaos, shortages, poverty, and mass death. More on anarchic decentralized planning.
Mises demonstrated that competition under capitalism is of an entirely different character than competition in the animal kingdom. It is not a competition for scarce, nature-given means of subsistence, but a competition in the positive creation of new and additional wealth, from which all gain.
In a capitalist society, von Mises showed, privately owned means of production serve the market. The physical beneficiaries of the factories and mills are all who buy their products. And, together with the incentive of profit and loss and the freedom of competition that it implies, the existence of private ownership ensures an ever-growing supply of products for all.
The opposite of the "division of labor" is isolationism, "survivalism" and bare subsistence.
The existence and successful functioning of the division of labor, however, vitally depends on the institutions of a capitalist society—that is, on limited government and economic freedom, private ownership of land and all other property, exchange and money, saving and investment, economic inequality and economic competition, and the profit motive—institutions everywhere under attack for several generations
Mises is correct, but doesn't go far enough. These "institutions" in turn depend on religion and morality, a subject Mises avoided. Each of these institutions depends on a shared moral condemnation of theft, the initiation of force, and each of "the seven deadly sins," such as envy, as well as the social endorsement of virtues like "the Protestant Work Ethic." A great leap forward in human progress will be made when we restore a general understanding of the Biblical position that currency debasement is an act of violence against the poor.

Mises was a materialist. He accurately described how society materially prospers under freedom from the initiation of force. He did not -- and could not -- explain why, if John Maynard Keynes was right, and "in the long run we're all dead," there is any reason (or moral argument) against seizing power and becoming a socialist or fascist central planner, profiting in the short run, while destroying civilization in the long run.

Capitalism, or the Free Market, is what George Washington, in one of the most famous addresses in American history, called "national morality":
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness—these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, "where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice?" And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
Thanks to Lew Rockwell and the Mises Institute (and Ron Paul), Misesean (or "Austrian") economics are experiencing something of a resurgence. But without a Christian foundation, this resurgence (wrong word, actually, since there never was a "surgence" to "re-" about) will be short-lived.

Most Christians today are ignorant of Keynes and his philosophy of "in the long run we're all dead." But Christians are even more ignorant of the battle of Clapham vs. Bloomsbury. William Wilberforce was a member of the Clapham Circle, seeking to abolish slavery and reform culture along Biblical lines. Keynes was a member of the Bloomsbury circle. Although the homosexual Keynes shared the Bloomsbury vision that economist Joseph Schumpeter delicately referred to as a "childless vision," it was not without a future orientation. Keynes recalled the Bloomsbury days:
It was exciting, exhilarating, the beginning of a renaissance, the opening of a new heaven on a new earth, we were the forerunners of a new dispensation, we were not afraid of anything.
This is a religion which is a mirror-image of the Christian religion. The lines were vividly drawn by Aldous Huxley, grandson of "Darwin's Bulldog," Thomas H. Huxley:
I had motives for not wanting the world to have a meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem in pure metaphysics, he is also concerned to prove that there is no valid reason why he personally should not do as he wants to do, or why his friends should not seize political power and govern in the way that they find most advantageous to themselves. . . . For myself, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation, sexual and political."
It is a great irony that Keynes and his ilk have a passionate long-term religious vision, while Mises and his secular followers have no lasting foundation for a humane society. In the long run, secular Miseseans are dead.

Human society and material prosperity are intensely dependent on Christian morality. And the adoption of Christian morality depends upon the regeneration of the human heart. If you pray for capitalism, pray for revival.