At the end of China's "Cultural Revolution" (and the murder of tens of millions of Chinese by the Communists), the average American was 20 times richer than the average Chinese. Historian Niall Ferguson attributes this economic growth to "Six Killer Apps" or institutions unique to the West:
He lists the following as sources of economic wealth, arising largely after 1800:
1. Competition
2. The Scientific Revolution
3. Property Rights
4. Modern Medicine
5. The Consumer Society
6. The Work Ethic
To the extent that these are valuable and durable institutions, they are Christian institutions. "The State" is destructive of Christian institutions.
1. "Competition" means "freedom." The State hates competition. The State is itself a monopoly. The State attracts those who hate competition like a light attracts moths.
2. The Scientific Method "is not Western, but Christian," concluded Stanley Jaki, a prizewinning historian of science. (Jaki is discussed by Tom Woods in a book we referenced back in 2007.)
3. Property rights are described by the Prophet Micah:
And each of them will sit
under his vine and under his fig tree,
With no one to make them afraid.
80% of people living in Protestant nations own property. 10% in non-Christian nations.
More private property has been confiscated by thieves in the public sector than by thieves in the private sector. The greatest enemy of private property is archism.
4. Modern medicine stands in contrast to shamanism. Science and healing are dominion and charity. It was missionaries that took medicine to Africa. The availability of modern medicine to the masses is the product of private property and
5. The Consumer Society
Ferguson notes that most of the world's wealth (over $100 Trillion), was created after 1800. This also marks the rise of secularism in the west. Does this show that economic growth is better served by secularism than by Christianity? Economists consider porno DVD's as "wealth." Value is subjective. "The Consumer Society" is both a covetous and an idolatrous society. "The Consumer Society" eventually becomes the Warfare Society, to protect and conquer coveted "wealth." In the medieval era, wars were limited events fought by professional soldiers, and left workers and consumers alone. With the rise of "the consumer society," wars are fought by and against consumers, slaughtering them on a massive scale. Again, the State is the beneficiary.
What Ferguson should have identified as the valuable institution ("app") is the Division of Labor.
6. The Work Ethic, once known as the Protestant Work Ethic, is now the South Korean work ethic. The education of the average 15 year old in Shanghai is now superior to that of the average American teen to the same degree that the average American's test scores are higher than the average teenager from Albania or Tunisia.
The Calvinist Work Ethic was the doctrine that being a butcher, a baker, or a candlestick maker was every bit as holy as being a priest, and that God blessed work with economic prosperity as a foretaste of eternal salvation. Calvin was opposed to the covetous consumer society.
The rise of secularism, consumerist "wealth," and the mega-warfare/welfare state, coincide with the death of the Protestant Work Ethic.
"Western Civilization" is Christian Civilization.
"The Consumer Society" is not.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Monday, September 19, 2011
Competing with the Federal Reserve
"Federal Express" is not a federal agency, that is, an agency of the federal government. It is a private business. Its competition includes UPS and DHL. Competition forces all these businesses to do a better job.
The "Federal Reserve Board" is not a federal agency, that is, an agency of the federal government. It is a private business. Its competition includes . . .
... nobody.
The Federal Reserve creates our money. It has no competition. As a result, the value of the Fed's money has gone steadily down. The Fed is an evil monopoly which ought to be abolished.
The government requires everybody to use money created by the Federal Reserve through "legal tender" laws.
The Constitution says:
That's exactly where we are today.
Just like businesses are allowed to compete against "Federal Express," entrepreneurs should be allowed to set up currency businesses to compete against the Federal Reserve, and create currencies which are more moral, and more in line with the Constitution.
The Post Office was a needless monopoly. The Federal Reserve is a needless monopoly.
From The Monetary Future:
The Free Competition in Currency Act of 2011
The "Federal Reserve Board" is not a federal agency, that is, an agency of the federal government. It is a private business. Its competition includes . . .
... nobody.
The Federal Reserve creates our money. It has no competition. As a result, the value of the Fed's money has gone steadily down. The Fed is an evil monopoly which ought to be abolished.
The government requires everybody to use money created by the Federal Reserve through "legal tender" laws.
The Constitution says:
No State shall ... make any thing but gold and silver a legal tender in payment of debts;James Madison, explained this clause of the Constitution in the Federalist Papers. He said paper money (currency not backed by gold or silver) has "pestilent effects" "on the industry and morals of the people." That means paper money causes economic productivity to go down, and crime to go up.
That's exactly where we are today.
Just like businesses are allowed to compete against "Federal Express," entrepreneurs should be allowed to set up currency businesses to compete against the Federal Reserve, and create currencies which are more moral, and more in line with the Constitution.
The Post Office was a needless monopoly. The Federal Reserve is a needless monopoly.
From The Monetary Future:
The Free Competition in Currency Act of 2011
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
The Spirit of Deregulation
Ignoring bureaucratic laws to do what's right.
It's a good thing FEMA didn't know about this. They would have found a way to "protect" us from this "anarchy."
It's a good thing FEMA didn't know about this. They would have found a way to "protect" us from this "anarchy."
Friday, September 02, 2011
Schlafly on China
Phyllis Schlafly says Candidates Should Be Talking About China:
The media are absorbed with the race for the Republican presidential nomination, commenting on daily fluctuations in the polls, and predicting who will win. But why are they omitting discussion of the elephant in the room — China?
When Donald Trump briefly considered running for President, his straight talk about China helped him rise to the top of the Republican field. So, why aren't the media interrogators asking other candidates any China questions?
Communist China is a tremendous national security issue. The only cut Barack Obama is willing to make in federal spending is in our military power, which means he will be ceding our military superiority to China and other hostile totalitarian nations.
While Obama is shutting down our U.S. space program, China is going full-speed ahead to achieve space dominance along with the ability to deny it to America. Space is essential to the gathering, transmission and use of information necessary to fight and win future wars.
This year China unveiled a new, high-tech stealth fighter plane that could pose a significant threat to our air superiority. A Chinese military milestone was passed when China's first aircraft carrier completed its maiden voyage.
China is deploying a new anti-ship ballistic missile that can sink U.S. aircraft carriers. China is developing electromagnetic pulse weapons to use against our aircraft carriers in any conflict over Taiwan.
Communist China is a huge jobs issue, and jobs is the number-one presidential campaign issue. China is a killer of U.S. jobs, not only from U.S. outsourcing but by taking thousands of construction jobs away from U.S. workers.
Despite California's 10 percent unemployment, China will soon finish rebuilding the great San Francisco-Oakland Bay bridge damaged in the 1989 earthquake. A Chinese company built the construction machinery and the 12 bridge segments in China and is installing them in California, using 3,000 imported Chinese workers (steel-cutters, welders, engineers, etc.), paid $12 a day, working 7 a.m. till 11 p.m., seven days a week, and sleeping in a company dorm.
China has already built seven U.S. schools, and has bought a large chunk of real estate in Toledo, Ohio and oil and gas fields in Texas. China has contracts to build a 4,000-room casino in Atlantic City, and to refurbish the Alexander Hamilton bridge over the Harlem River.
In Idaho, China is using a federal program that grants permanent residency to foreign nationals and special tax exemptions to foreign firms that move to the U.S. But surprise, surprise, the Chinese industries in Idaho will be staffed by imported Chinese workers.
Targets of Chinese investment in New York include the New York subway system, a Metro-North train platform near Yankee stadium, luxury apartments, and major leases in the Empire State Building and the World Trade Center.
After General Electric's CEO, Jeffrey Immelt, closed all G.E.'s U.S. Edison light bulb plants and opened a light bulb plant in China, Barack Obama named Immelt his Jobs Czar. Immelt then announced G.E. will move its 115-year-old X-ray division from Wisconsin to Beijing, where G.E. will invest $2 billion, train 65 engineers, and create six research centers.
G.E. is now pursuing a joint venture with China to build the avionics for a new commercial plane that will compete with Boeing and Airbus. Of course, China will use this technology for military purposes, too.
China is now asking Missouri taxpayers to build a cargo hub at Lambert-St.Louis Airport, called Aerotropolis, for the use of Shanghai-based China Cargo Airlines. China expects Missouri to give the Chinese $360 million in tax credits to subsidize this cargo hub, with millions of square feet of warehouse and factory space.
The new Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial should be stamped "Made in China." It was sculpted in China by a Chinese sculptor out of Chinese granite and assembled in the U.S. by imported Chinese workers.
Communist China is a big medical issue. More than 80 percent of the active ingredients for prescription drugs sold in the United States are made in other countries, mostly in China or India, where the manufacturers and facilities are rarely or never inspected.
Several years ago, the Chinese deliberately substituted a cheap fake ingredient in the blood-thinner Heparin. That caused 81 U.S. deaths before it was pulled from use.
Now we learn that 180 drugs needed to treat leukemia, cancer and other diseases are in dangerously short supply because of contamination in facilities in China and India. While a deal is now being negotiated to start U.S. inspection of Chinese drug plants, there is no reason to believe that occasional inspections will make the drugs safe.
This is a combination of real problems and boogey-men.
There are two ways to deal with the real problems: power or service. Put another way: bombs or ethics. Put still another way: imperialism or a City upon a Hill. America was built on a Christian social foundation which held that "Religion, morality, and knowledge, [are] necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind." Religion and morality are the only antidote to big government.
The "military superiority" which Schlafly advocates is indistinguishable from Chinese Communism. It is the "big government" solution. The ideology of the Chinese "communists" is not fundamentally or qualitatively different from the ideology of Bush-Paulson-Obaba-Geithner. Someday the Big U.S. Government will decide to merge with the Big Chinese Government, and nobody will really notice.
The media are absorbed with the race for the Republican presidential nomination, commenting on daily fluctuations in the polls, and predicting who will win. But why are they omitting discussion of the elephant in the room — China?
When Donald Trump briefly considered running for President, his straight talk about China helped him rise to the top of the Republican field. So, why aren't the media interrogators asking other candidates any China questions?
Communist China is a tremendous national security issue. The only cut Barack Obama is willing to make in federal spending is in our military power, which means he will be ceding our military superiority to China and other hostile totalitarian nations.
While Obama is shutting down our U.S. space program, China is going full-speed ahead to achieve space dominance along with the ability to deny it to America. Space is essential to the gathering, transmission and use of information necessary to fight and win future wars.
This year China unveiled a new, high-tech stealth fighter plane that could pose a significant threat to our air superiority. A Chinese military milestone was passed when China's first aircraft carrier completed its maiden voyage.
China is deploying a new anti-ship ballistic missile that can sink U.S. aircraft carriers. China is developing electromagnetic pulse weapons to use against our aircraft carriers in any conflict over Taiwan.
Communist China is a huge jobs issue, and jobs is the number-one presidential campaign issue. China is a killer of U.S. jobs, not only from U.S. outsourcing but by taking thousands of construction jobs away from U.S. workers.
Despite California's 10 percent unemployment, China will soon finish rebuilding the great San Francisco-Oakland Bay bridge damaged in the 1989 earthquake. A Chinese company built the construction machinery and the 12 bridge segments in China and is installing them in California, using 3,000 imported Chinese workers (steel-cutters, welders, engineers, etc.), paid $12 a day, working 7 a.m. till 11 p.m., seven days a week, and sleeping in a company dorm.
China has already built seven U.S. schools, and has bought a large chunk of real estate in Toledo, Ohio and oil and gas fields in Texas. China has contracts to build a 4,000-room casino in Atlantic City, and to refurbish the Alexander Hamilton bridge over the Harlem River.
In Idaho, China is using a federal program that grants permanent residency to foreign nationals and special tax exemptions to foreign firms that move to the U.S. But surprise, surprise, the Chinese industries in Idaho will be staffed by imported Chinese workers.
Targets of Chinese investment in New York include the New York subway system, a Metro-North train platform near Yankee stadium, luxury apartments, and major leases in the Empire State Building and the World Trade Center.
After General Electric's CEO, Jeffrey Immelt, closed all G.E.'s U.S. Edison light bulb plants and opened a light bulb plant in China, Barack Obama named Immelt his Jobs Czar. Immelt then announced G.E. will move its 115-year-old X-ray division from Wisconsin to Beijing, where G.E. will invest $2 billion, train 65 engineers, and create six research centers.
G.E. is now pursuing a joint venture with China to build the avionics for a new commercial plane that will compete with Boeing and Airbus. Of course, China will use this technology for military purposes, too.
China is now asking Missouri taxpayers to build a cargo hub at Lambert-St.Louis Airport, called Aerotropolis, for the use of Shanghai-based China Cargo Airlines. China expects Missouri to give the Chinese $360 million in tax credits to subsidize this cargo hub, with millions of square feet of warehouse and factory space.
The new Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial should be stamped "Made in China." It was sculpted in China by a Chinese sculptor out of Chinese granite and assembled in the U.S. by imported Chinese workers.
Communist China is a big medical issue. More than 80 percent of the active ingredients for prescription drugs sold in the United States are made in other countries, mostly in China or India, where the manufacturers and facilities are rarely or never inspected.
Several years ago, the Chinese deliberately substituted a cheap fake ingredient in the blood-thinner Heparin. That caused 81 U.S. deaths before it was pulled from use.
Now we learn that 180 drugs needed to treat leukemia, cancer and other diseases are in dangerously short supply because of contamination in facilities in China and India. While a deal is now being negotiated to start U.S. inspection of Chinese drug plants, there is no reason to believe that occasional inspections will make the drugs safe.
This is a combination of real problems and boogey-men.
There are two ways to deal with the real problems: power or service. Put another way: bombs or ethics. Put still another way: imperialism or a City upon a Hill. America was built on a Christian social foundation which held that "Religion, morality, and knowledge, [are] necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind." Religion and morality are the only antidote to big government.
The "military superiority" which Schlafly advocates is indistinguishable from Chinese Communism. It is the "big government" solution. The ideology of the Chinese "communists" is not fundamentally or qualitatively different from the ideology of Bush-Paulson-Obaba-Geithner. Someday the Big U.S. Government will decide to merge with the Big Chinese Government, and nobody will really notice.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Government Welfare
Penn Jillette writes:
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.
My own take.
Fostering multi-generational dependence on government welfare programs is not compassion. It is slavery. It is evil.
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.
My own take.
Fostering multi-generational dependence on government welfare programs is not compassion. It is slavery. It is evil.
Friday, August 12, 2011
Peace One Day
Here is an energetic campaigner:
So why don't I share his optimism?
First, as long as human beings are at war with their Creator, they will be at war with every human being who is created in His image.
Second, those who want to “be as gods, knowing good and evil” -- and I'm speaking primarily about those who are part of "the State" -- will never give up war, because "war is the health of the State." To the extent that heads of state join in promoting this day of peace, it is only symbolism, as one of his critics said. I can agree with Bretigne Shaffer:
if we are even to imagine "... a bright, warless world," then it is not enough to build memorials, march for peace or repeat the mantra "never again!" It is not enough to appeal to those who start and live by wars to make them stop. We must identify the real source of all war: Not a particular nation or even a particular kind of weapon, but the institution of the state itself, with no real mechanism to hold it accountable, that enables some people to rain death and unimaginable misery upon others with impunity
Remembering Mr. Miyamoto
But this still begs the question. How to get those at the helm of the State to repudiate the vehicle through which they exercise their own deity. The fundamental issue is not military or political, it is religious.
I certainly support his idea for a day of peace, however. And I can only be impressed with the degree to which he has put his feet to the pavement in pursuit of his goal. I should be as dedicated in pursuit of my goal.
So why don't I share his optimism?
First, as long as human beings are at war with their Creator, they will be at war with every human being who is created in His image.
Second, those who want to “be as gods, knowing good and evil” -- and I'm speaking primarily about those who are part of "the State" -- will never give up war, because "war is the health of the State." To the extent that heads of state join in promoting this day of peace, it is only symbolism, as one of his critics said. I can agree with Bretigne Shaffer:
if we are even to imagine "... a bright, warless world," then it is not enough to build memorials, march for peace or repeat the mantra "never again!" It is not enough to appeal to those who start and live by wars to make them stop. We must identify the real source of all war: Not a particular nation or even a particular kind of weapon, but the institution of the state itself, with no real mechanism to hold it accountable, that enables some people to rain death and unimaginable misery upon others with impunity
Remembering Mr. Miyamoto
But this still begs the question. How to get those at the helm of the State to repudiate the vehicle through which they exercise their own deity. The fundamental issue is not military or political, it is religious.
I certainly support his idea for a day of peace, however. And I can only be impressed with the degree to which he has put his feet to the pavement in pursuit of his goal. I should be as dedicated in pursuit of my goal.
Friday, August 05, 2011
Hiroshima, August 6 / Nagasaki, August 9
Saturday is the anniversary of the U.S. bombing of Hiroshima, Japan. The U.S. Federal government is the only government on earth that has used nuclear weapons to annihilate thousands of innocent, non-combatant civilians.
While some have suggested that this saved thousands of U.S. soldiers from dying in a U.S. invasion of Japan, others of equal credibility and authority have rebutted that claim. Japan was ready to surrender before the Bombs were dropped, but wanted the Emperor to be allowed to save face. The U.S. Government demanded unconditional surrender, dropped the atomic bombs on innocent populations of people, then allowed Japan to keep the Emperor anyway.
Speculations about how many U.S. soldiers might have died if there had actually been an invasion of Japan should be weighed against speculations as to how many Chinese would have been murdered by Japan had Japan conquered mainland China, and these speculations need to be compared with the non-speculative actual results of history: over 60 million Chinese were actually murdered by the communists, who filled the void the U.S. left by disabling Japan.
All these speculations cannot justify nuclear annihilations of populations. They simply have no legitimate place, because the Bible says we should beat our swords into plowshares. The Bible also says we are not to resist "the powers that be":
Romans 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
Is the United States now on the brink of receiving economic damnation 70 years later for resisting Powers-That-Be Group A (The Axis powers) and replacing them with Powers-That-Be Group B (the Communists), inflicting 72 million casualties world-wide as a direct effect of the resistance, and another 100 million deaths subsequently inflicted by U.S.-backed Communism?
Sentencing this many people to death -- sacrificing them to geo-political speculation -- is the mark of unbridled arrogance on the part of a government that thinks it is God. "The Powers that be" are not ordained by Washington D.C.
And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever: that considering numbers, nature and natural means only, a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation, is among possible events: that it may become probable by supernatural interference! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest.
-- Thomas Jefferson
Kevin Craig on Hiroshima
While some have suggested that this saved thousands of U.S. soldiers from dying in a U.S. invasion of Japan, others of equal credibility and authority have rebutted that claim. Japan was ready to surrender before the Bombs were dropped, but wanted the Emperor to be allowed to save face. The U.S. Government demanded unconditional surrender, dropped the atomic bombs on innocent populations of people, then allowed Japan to keep the Emperor anyway.
Speculations about how many U.S. soldiers might have died if there had actually been an invasion of Japan should be weighed against speculations as to how many Chinese would have been murdered by Japan had Japan conquered mainland China, and these speculations need to be compared with the non-speculative actual results of history: over 60 million Chinese were actually murdered by the communists, who filled the void the U.S. left by disabling Japan.
All these speculations cannot justify nuclear annihilations of populations. They simply have no legitimate place, because the Bible says we should beat our swords into plowshares. The Bible also says we are not to resist "the powers that be":
Romans 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
Is the United States now on the brink of receiving economic damnation 70 years later for resisting Powers-That-Be Group A (The Axis powers) and replacing them with Powers-That-Be Group B (the Communists), inflicting 72 million casualties world-wide as a direct effect of the resistance, and another 100 million deaths subsequently inflicted by U.S.-backed Communism?
Sentencing this many people to death -- sacrificing them to geo-political speculation -- is the mark of unbridled arrogance on the part of a government that thinks it is God. "The Powers that be" are not ordained by Washington D.C.
And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever: that considering numbers, nature and natural means only, a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation, is among possible events: that it may become probable by supernatural interference! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest.
-- Thomas Jefferson
Kevin Craig on Hiroshima
Ozarks Virtual Town Hall, August 6th -- Pacifism
Looking back at the 20th century, the pacifists have been proven right. No war in the 20th century resulted in the net expansion of liberty or a higher standard of living for the planet's population.
Saturday's "Ozarks Virtual Town Hall" will begin with the anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima with a nuclear bomb. The first use of an atomic bomb -- on a civilian population -- is one of the epic events in all of human history. Will either party mention it in their Saturday morning addresses to the nation? Will either party call for a return to the foreign policy of Jefferson and George Washington:
The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible."
— Washington, Farewell Address (1796) [Washington’s emphasis]
Listen on Saturday at 10:30 am and find out:
Phone number to call:
Webcast Player:
Question Submission:
Saturday's "Ozarks Virtual Town Hall" will begin with the anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima with a nuclear bomb. The first use of an atomic bomb -- on a civilian population -- is one of the epic events in all of human history. Will either party mention it in their Saturday morning addresses to the nation? Will either party call for a return to the foreign policy of Jefferson and George Washington:
The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible."
— Washington, Farewell Address (1796) [Washington’s emphasis]
I deem [one of] the essential principles of our government, and consequently [one] which ought to shape its administration,…peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.
— Jefferson, First Inaugural Address (1801)
Listen on Saturday at 10:30 am and find out:
Phone number to call:
Webcast Player:
Question Submission:
Sunday, July 31, 2011
The Department of Un-Subjection
People criticize pacifists like me for being "utopian." They say following Jesus the Pacifist is "impractical" and "unrealistic" in a world of terrorists and would-be invaders.
People also criticize anarchists like me for not being in "subjection" to government. They quote Bible passages like these:
Romans 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Romans 13:5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
Titus 3:1 Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work,
1 Peter 2:13-14 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.
They don't usually quote this verse, though it fits perfectly:
Matthew 5:41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
Israel, you may recall, had been invaded by the barbaric, pagan, unclean Roman Empire, who put Israel under tribute, and stationed soldiers throughout the country. These soldiers were authorized to conscript Israeli citizens and compel them to carry the soldier's provisions for up to one mile. This infuriated many Israelites, who longed for the Messiah to liberate them from the Roman occupation. Many were making plans to be a part of a violent revolution against Caesar.
Jesus repudiated violent revolution. "Render unto Caesar." Pay your taxes.
This surely means that the American Revolution was not Biblically justified.
The Apostle Paul echoed Jesus in Romans 12 and 13. Jesus said "Resist not evil." Paul adds, not even the government, the greatest evil-doer of all.
And if we are not allowed to resist the powers that be, how can we justify resisting the powers that wanna be -- imperialists who are not yet "the powers that be," but are invading our country with the intention to set themselves up as "the powers that be."
Was it Jesus' position that Israel should have/could have resisted the Roman invasion, but once the invasion was successful, Israelites could no longer resist the occupation?
Those who patriotically support the government and the traditional interpretation of Romans 13 usually also "support the troops."
But isn't the Defense Department actually a Department of Un-Subjection? Isn't the Defense Department an unwillingness to obey Biblical commands to be in subjection, and not to resist the powers that be (or the powers that wanna be)? Isn't the U.S. Department of Un-Subjection not only fomenting resistance on our part, but actively engaged in resisting "the powers that be" in many foreign nations? If the people of Iraq were commanded by Jesus to "render unto Saddam," how is the U.S. Defense Department justified in violently overthrowing this foreign government, and exempt from these commands to be in "subjection?"
The same Greek word in Romans 13 is found in 1 Peter 2, where slaves are commanded to be "subject" to their masters. Were Christians like William Wilberforce violating the Biblical worldview by attempting to abolish the institution of slavery? What argument can be made that we should not abolish the institution of "the State" that would not prohibit us from abolishing slavery? Without slavery, slaves would not work, but would riot in the streets. Without "the State," those who are commanded to be "subject" to it will break out into crime waves and labor strikes.
Romans 13 does not command patriotic allegiance and flag-waving loyalty to Caesar, but only a pacifistic non-resistance to evil. "The powers that be" are evil. We eventually will overcome evil with good, as imperialists see our good works, and repent of the evil of being occupation troops and collectors of tribute.
Washington D.C. is an occupation government, just as Rome was in Israel.
In order to save America the Christian nation, we must abolish Washington D.C., the atheistic empire. We will overcome this evil regime with good, not with the Second Amendment.
People also criticize anarchists like me for not being in "subjection" to government. They quote Bible passages like these:
Romans 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Romans 13:5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
Titus 3:1 Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work,
1 Peter 2:13-14 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.
They don't usually quote this verse, though it fits perfectly:
Matthew 5:41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
Israel, you may recall, had been invaded by the barbaric, pagan, unclean Roman Empire, who put Israel under tribute, and stationed soldiers throughout the country. These soldiers were authorized to conscript Israeli citizens and compel them to carry the soldier's provisions for up to one mile. This infuriated many Israelites, who longed for the Messiah to liberate them from the Roman occupation. Many were making plans to be a part of a violent revolution against Caesar.
Jesus repudiated violent revolution. "Render unto Caesar." Pay your taxes.
This surely means that the American Revolution was not Biblically justified.
The Apostle Paul echoed Jesus in Romans 12 and 13. Jesus said "Resist not evil." Paul adds, not even the government, the greatest evil-doer of all.
And if we are not allowed to resist the powers that be, how can we justify resisting the powers that wanna be -- imperialists who are not yet "the powers that be," but are invading our country with the intention to set themselves up as "the powers that be."
Was it Jesus' position that Israel should have/could have resisted the Roman invasion, but once the invasion was successful, Israelites could no longer resist the occupation?
Those who patriotically support the government and the traditional interpretation of Romans 13 usually also "support the troops."
But isn't the Defense Department actually a Department of Un-Subjection? Isn't the Defense Department an unwillingness to obey Biblical commands to be in subjection, and not to resist the powers that be (or the powers that wanna be)? Isn't the U.S. Department of Un-Subjection not only fomenting resistance on our part, but actively engaged in resisting "the powers that be" in many foreign nations? If the people of Iraq were commanded by Jesus to "render unto Saddam," how is the U.S. Defense Department justified in violently overthrowing this foreign government, and exempt from these commands to be in "subjection?"
The same Greek word in Romans 13 is found in 1 Peter 2, where slaves are commanded to be "subject" to their masters. Were Christians like William Wilberforce violating the Biblical worldview by attempting to abolish the institution of slavery? What argument can be made that we should not abolish the institution of "the State" that would not prohibit us from abolishing slavery? Without slavery, slaves would not work, but would riot in the streets. Without "the State," those who are commanded to be "subject" to it will break out into crime waves and labor strikes.
Romans 13 does not command patriotic allegiance and flag-waving loyalty to Caesar, but only a pacifistic non-resistance to evil. "The powers that be" are evil. We eventually will overcome evil with good, as imperialists see our good works, and repent of the evil of being occupation troops and collectors of tribute.
Washington D.C. is an occupation government, just as Rome was in Israel.
In order to save America the Christian nation, we must abolish Washington D.C., the atheistic empire. We will overcome this evil regime with good, not with the Second Amendment.
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Abortion, Kissinger, and The World Bank
BBC News - Sex selection: The forgotten story - Did the West stoke the scourge of sex selection in Asia?
But the story of sex selection in Asia is not as simple as it looks from the outside, writes award-winning science journalist Mara Hvistendahl in her startling new book Unnatural Selection.
Hvistendahl points a finger at the West for encouraging the epidemic of sex selection which has gripped Asia since the early 1970s.
Amniocentesis tests and ultrasound scans have led to more than 160 million girls being aborted in Asia alone since then, according to one widely quoted 2005 estimate.
It had to do, Hvistendahl writes, with the West's paranoid population control movement during the Cold War - a growing fear that more hungry babies would grow up and turn to communism. The "monster of sex determination in Asia" lead to vastly skewed ratios in countries like India, China and South Korea.
Western money, she writes, was used to set up an extensive network of family planning advisers and doctors that encouraged women to opt for amniocentesis.
In 1969, sex determination was included as one of the 12 new strategies for global birth control at a US workshop. Henry Kissinger, then secretary of state under Richard Nixon, signed a classified memo stating that "abortion is vital to the solution" of population growth in the world.
So in India, Hvistendahl says, advisers from the World Bank and other organisations pressured the government to "adapt a paradigm" where population was the problem. The Rockefeller Foundation and the Ford Foundation poured money into "research into reproductive biology".
THE NSSM 200 DIRECTIVE AND THE STUDY REQUESTED - The Life and Death of NSSM 200 - Chapter 3
National Security Study Memorandum 200 Blueprint for world de-population and western domination
How Eugenics and Population Control Led to Abortion
But the story of sex selection in Asia is not as simple as it looks from the outside, writes award-winning science journalist Mara Hvistendahl in her startling new book Unnatural Selection.
Hvistendahl points a finger at the West for encouraging the epidemic of sex selection which has gripped Asia since the early 1970s.
Amniocentesis tests and ultrasound scans have led to more than 160 million girls being aborted in Asia alone since then, according to one widely quoted 2005 estimate.
It had to do, Hvistendahl writes, with the West's paranoid population control movement during the Cold War - a growing fear that more hungry babies would grow up and turn to communism. The "monster of sex determination in Asia" lead to vastly skewed ratios in countries like India, China and South Korea.
Western money, she writes, was used to set up an extensive network of family planning advisers and doctors that encouraged women to opt for amniocentesis.
In 1969, sex determination was included as one of the 12 new strategies for global birth control at a US workshop. Henry Kissinger, then secretary of state under Richard Nixon, signed a classified memo stating that "abortion is vital to the solution" of population growth in the world.
So in India, Hvistendahl says, advisers from the World Bank and other organisations pressured the government to "adapt a paradigm" where population was the problem. The Rockefeller Foundation and the Ford Foundation poured money into "research into reproductive biology".
THE NSSM 200 DIRECTIVE AND THE STUDY REQUESTED - The Life and Death of NSSM 200 - Chapter 3
National Security Study Memorandum 200 Blueprint for world de-population and western domination
How Eugenics and Population Control Led to Abortion
The Fed Audit: Taxation Without Representation
Really, now; what's so bad about "taxation without representation?"
Taxation is theft, at least without some color of legal authority.
Suppose Congress passed a law giving the Chinese government authority to take as much money as it wanted out of our paychecks. Would that be "representation?" Most people would say no.
What if Congress passed a law giving bankers the authority to print all the money they wanted, even if that meant that the dollars in our savings accounts would lose purchasing power?
It's called "The Federal Reserve," and since the latter part of 2007, has printed over $16 Trillion out of thin air and given it to other banks, even banks overseas, robbing our dollars of the power to purchase things we had planned to purchase, or create jobs we had planned to create.
The Fed Audit - Newsroom: U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (Vermont)
Fed Audit: Trillions For Foreign Banks, Conflicts of Interest
Inflation is a tax, a transfer of purchasing power. The Fed is taxation without representation. The Declaration of Independence says this is tyranny, and it says we have a duty to abolish tyranny.
Taxation is theft, at least without some color of legal authority.
Suppose Congress passed a law giving the Chinese government authority to take as much money as it wanted out of our paychecks. Would that be "representation?" Most people would say no.
What if Congress passed a law giving bankers the authority to print all the money they wanted, even if that meant that the dollars in our savings accounts would lose purchasing power?
It's called "The Federal Reserve," and since the latter part of 2007, has printed over $16 Trillion out of thin air and given it to other banks, even banks overseas, robbing our dollars of the power to purchase things we had planned to purchase, or create jobs we had planned to create.
The Fed Audit - Newsroom: U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (Vermont)
Fed Audit: Trillions For Foreign Banks, Conflicts of Interest
Inflation is a tax, a transfer of purchasing power. The Fed is taxation without representation. The Declaration of Independence says this is tyranny, and it says we have a duty to abolish tyranny.
Friday, July 22, 2011
July 23 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
We'll get started at 10:30am Central Time, this coming Saturday Morning, after the President posts his Radio Address to the Nation, and the Republicans post their response. Congressional Candidate Kevin Craig will give a libertarian response, then we hope you will share your comments or questions.
To listen to replay:
Town Hall Archives
To listen to replay:
Town Hall Archives
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Liberaltarianism and our Founding Fathers...
As a compulsive debater, I'm glad I have a blog to answer hate mail. There's nothing positive or edifying about the letter below, but it gives me a chance to make a few comments.
| Subject: | Liberaltarianism and our Founding Fathers... |
| From: | telesia55@gmail.com |
| Date: | Sun, July 17, 2011 3:08 pm |
| To: | KevinCraig@KevinCraig.US |
Please, do NOT call our Founding Fathers "Libertarian". They were not and never will be. By any of today's measures, even the liberals of THEIR day would be considered "ultra-conservative".
You Liberaltarians are little more than re-branded liberals trying to get over on an unsuspecting public, and your ilk are truly sick and out in left field - as Rep. Ron Paul exemplifies so handily.
Do not bother replying. This e-mail is sent from a "junk" spam account where all incoming mail is automatically deleted. I have no desire to hear your liberal nonsense.
For the record, I'm a Constitutionalist... if it isn't in our Constitution, it has no place in American life.
To the extent that the Founding Fathers opposed tyranny and British monarchy, they were libertarian. But the "liberals" of their day were also libertarians, so I don't know what the letter-writer is trying to say. Lew Rockwell writes:
In the 18th and 19th centuries, the term liberalism generally meant a philosophy of public life that affirmed the following principle: societies and all their component parts need no central management and control because societies generally manage themselves through the voluntary interaction of its members to their mutual benefit.
I agree, however, that both the Founders and "liberals" would have been shocked at federally-funded abortion and homosexual "marriages." They were, on "social issues," ultra-conservatives.
"Liberaltarians" -- a term that came into vogue in late 2006 and went out of vogue a few months later -- refers to libertarians who think there are more points of common ground with left-leaning folks than with right-leaning folks. I disagree; both sides are hopeless. Or, both sides are equally fertile.
I am completely unaware of the late-breaking news that Ron Paul is a former liberal, that is, a former advocate of bigger government.
For those who haven't already read my "liberal nonsense," try here.
For my views on why anything that's not in the Constitution has no place in American life, see here, here, here, here, here, and maybe here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)