Humility or Marxism?

Two things caught my attention today.  A sermon from the Associate Pastor candidate at our church this morning and an article shared on Facebook by a friend’s daughter.

The sermon was based on the following:

Philippians 2

Imitating Christ’s Humility

1 Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2 then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind. 3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, 4not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.

5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature[b] of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!

The article in Vanity Fair is, not surprisingly an “Eat the Rich” lecture about income inequality titled “Of the 1%, By the 1%, For the 1%.

I don’t know if their “statistics” are based on valid data, but I do note the false premise often used by Progressives/Socialists/Marxists (Note: they do not include the statistics regarding where the lion’s share of the tax revenue comes from as well as the fact that we are nearing a point where almost half the people in this country pay no taxes, but that’s a post for another time):

Some people look at income inequality and shrug their shoulders. So what if this person gains and that person loses?

At this point a loud buzzer sounds and the reader should ask themselves:  Is every gain by someone a loss to another?  A socialist would say yes.  I don’t think a follower of Christ would agree.  That is because the world view of these two people are, “world’s apart.”

The article goes on to tell us why our economy is doing so poorly and what needs to be done to change that:

Third, and perhaps most important, a modern economy requires “collective action”—it needs government to invest in infrastructure, education, and technology.

Collective action and government are the answer…..NOT!  The article continues:

None of this should come as a surprise—it is simply what happens when a society’s wealth distribution becomes lopsided. The more divided a society becomes in terms of wealth, the more reluctant the wealthy become to spend money on common needs. The rich don’t need to rely on government for parks or education or medical care or personal security—they can buy all these things for themselves. In the process, they become more distant from ordinary people, losing whatever empathy they may once have had.

Here I must agree with the statement made, minus the false assumption that this a result of “lopsided wealth distribution.”  My world view says that we become more distant from ordinary people and people who are truly in need of our help because government has taken over our charitable giving.  THEY take the resources and they distribute it to whom THEY deem worthy.  In the process our hearts become hardened and we leave it to the powerful elite to determine where our wealth should go.

Hear Paul’s words again:

3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, 4not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.

Christ changes our hearts and leads us to value others above ourselves.  Christ encourages us to look to the interests of others.  Government, laws, and executive orders do NOT accomplish that.

It breaks my heart and causes me great distress that our young people are being indoctrinated into the Marxist-based concept of “social justice” and have totally lost sight of what our Founders sought and that is equal justice.

The article continues:

They also worry about strong government—one that could use its powers to adjust the balance, take some of their wealth, and invest it for the common good.

You are darn right I worry about strong government that can use its powers to “adjust the balance, take some of their wealth and invest it for the common good.”  This is where history shows us just what can occur if that strong government is not tethered to something that guides it:  As I noted in my post “Divided We Fall” a passage from Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s biography:

The difference between real leadership and the false leadership of the Leader was this:  real leadership derived its authority from God, the source of all goodness.  Thus parents have legitimate authority because they are submitted to the legitimate authority of a good God.  But the authority of the Fuhrer was submitted to nothing.  It was self-derived and autocratic, and therefore had a messianic aspect.         (pg 141)

The authority of a Progressive/Marxist leadership is submitted to nothing.  Just read Saul Alinsky to confirm that.  Just review the horrors that come about when leadership is submitted to nothing.  They will USE Christian principles and quote Christ, but they are perverting the message for their own ends.  Do I believe that many of the social justice folks truly believe they are doing the right thing?  Yes.  But I have to add the caution that the German people, in particular the “German Church” thought what it was doing was correct also.

Our Constitutional Republic only works if it involves a moral people.  Abuses of Capitalism and our system of government do not demonstrate that Capitalism is dead and our Founding Documents are irrelevant.  It demonstrates that there indeed are people who do things for their own self interest and who can bring harm to others.  Setting up a socialistic/progressive/Marxist government does NOT eliminate this problem.  It makes it worse.

This entry was posted in Collectivist Narrative, Economy and National Debt, Planned Economy/Central Planning, Restoration of our Constitutional Republic, Social Justice, World View and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Humility or Marxism?

  1. Panther Pat says:

    Belle, Thanks for the heads-up on that Vanity Fair article, looks like a succint piece of much-needed truth-telling. It is unfortunate that you reject it (and modern economic realities) out of hand, apparently just because they don’t jibe with your pre-conceived truths.

    You similarly seem to have heard, but not grasped that sermon and those verses. The social programs put in place by government, laws and executive order have been put in place because we the people decided that we as a society should indeed collectively take care of our needy. This was done in accordance with our Constitutional deomocracy and represents the electoral will of the people.

    You are naive if you think churchs and individuals will step in to alleviate the widespread suffering that will occur if our social welfare and public jobs programs are dismantled. A quick look at the historical record of our industrialized aiociety gives the lie to the private charity premise. Prior to the New Deal, such private efforts proved far less than adequate to succour the many widows, orphans, disabled and indigent neglected by the predatory form of capitalism.

    If my parents were alive, they would provide vivid testimony as to the hunger and hardship faced by the widows and poor children of the 1910s-1930s.

    It is an even more dire scenario facing those who fall on hard times in our modern dispersed society, where near-by extended family and tight-knit neighborhoods no longer are ther to provide support for some segment of the needy. Modern times require modern solutions, we are no longer the agrarian society of the 1790s with unlimited land there for the taking

    As an example, my cousin works at the largest Pittsburgh food bank. He reports that requests for aid are sky-rocketing as times get harder and harder, many of the newly needy being former proud members of the middle class. At the same time, donations have been falling, as people are too strapped to give as much as they once did. Oh, and yeah, those donations largely came from working and middle class donors, they see a check from a wealthy fatcat once in a blue moon.

    Your post is downright insulting to people who perceive differently from you. Maybe young people and others cleave to “social justice” because their rattional minds and Christian hearts tell them it is right and good, not because they are “indoctrinated”. And when you repeatedly write “Progressive/Marxist” as if they by and large are the same, you pretty much indicate you are a careless thinker, and your opinions and arguments carry far less weight.

    And for the record, a “progressive/socialist/Marxist” does not necessarily believe ” every gain by someone is a loss to another”. Also, being a socialist and follower of Christ are not mutually exclusive, except to someone with a very narrow, politicized view as to what makes a Christian. This is ridiculous, as it is there in black and white, including thw vwry quotes you referenced, that Christ and the early Christians had views much more in alignment with democratic socialism than with ubbridled capitalism.

    Your conceptions re the Constitution (a living document) are fodder for future debate. Suffice it to say that without a “modern” application of the Constitution (= strong central government), the Pacific would be a Japanese lake and the Atlantic a German one, and we likely would have our own puppet “American” Fuhrer treating the Constitution like so much tissue paper. Sadly, that would be fine with some segment of Americans, and I strongly suspect the majority of those would be those types who tend to vote Republican/conservative.

    A strong government is a necessity in modern times. Our duty as citizens is to ensure that government indeed is tethered to some thing that guides it: the good of our people and the country in general, as opposed to its current increasing subordination to the interest of the wealthy global elite due to political corruption. Again, we need to fix the bad aspects of government thru campaign reform, etc., not dismantle those aspects which actually do some good for many of our people and help drive our economic engine.

    Bonhoeffer’s take on Hitler is informative, but Hitler’s rise to power was rooted in economic desperation, The cautionary tale you should heed is that if you throw increasing numbers of people on the streets with little opportunity, they will resort to violence and willingly follow a demogogue who offers sustenance, with perhaps an unnoticed side order of totalitarianism.

    The post-War social safety nets in the USA, Europe and most “advanced” countries arose only partly from altruistic impulses for “social justice”. The main motivation for these programs was pragmatism = a recognition that the private sector was incapable of providing jobs with adequate income for all, and that a lack of means for basic subsistence would generate chaos, violence and bolshevism among the populace.

    It is a matter of provwn economics. We need a strong government to protect the people from financial predators and mitigate the oligopolistic excesses of Darwinian capitalism. We also NEED that wealth redistribution engine of taxation/programs/jobs because the purely private engine proved inadequate to distribute wealth widely and reasonably fairly given modern paramters of automation, productivity, population, and globalism. “Market mechanisms” historically amount to widespread suffering, violence and migration, which is unacceptable for a stable, decent society.

    As a final note I will quote an Irish folk song from the glory days of Darwinian capitalism:

    The world is ill-divided
    Them that works the hardest
    Are the least provided

    • Pat- I don’t think you read my response to your last comment. I think you need to do that. As to your tone, I’m takin’ flack so I must be over the target. Just wish you could try to disagree without straying into the territory of being disagreeable.

  2. misscapri says:

    That’s just it – a lot of us who want to give to charities, don’t want our support going to support causes we disagree with and without our knowledge and permission. And even good sounding causes can turn out to be big frauds, and lately, the big line even legitimate charities use on people to get them giving is “We wish to thank you for your gift of $xxxxxxx last year and hope we can count on you again this year.” Yeay, right, liars, I didn’t give anything to you before and thanks for steering me clear of giving to you in future thanks to your dishonest solicitation. Even supposed police programs are using this line in telemarketing to try getting people to give. I don’t give to liars and I don’t give to fraudsters intentionally, and I’m not made of money in the first place.

    There was a program on TV about a year ago, maybe a bit further back, discussing this ‘wealth distribution’ thing, and someone made an excellent point, that it is a form of slavery. It’s government just stealing from you just because it can, and it decides that you don’t own what you earn once they consider you to have too much money, so they just want to take it away and use it to spend however they want instead.

    Wealth redistribution can ruin people. I’ve heard of people who almost got into the next tax bracket, but then the government taxed them so much that they went flat broke and were sent right back down to the poverty line. And yes, they worked their butts off to nearly get enough earnings to get into the next tax bracket.

    What the left-leaning (I’m loathed to use the words ‘Marxist/socialist because that just sounds like another frightened conservative talking-point, North America is not a communist continent yet and God willing it will never be) what these people never tell you is just how many rich people living big off the hog and on other’s ill-gotten money, are from their own liberal camp.

  3. Barry Cunningham says:

    Cogent, concise and to the point. Well said, Ms. Belle!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s