Socialism isn’t biblical

This is not about any political party; it is about a political theory, called Socialism.  It is also called, Communism, but only a few radicals still like it under that name.  

Socialism is the view that the people, thru their government “own” the economic engines of society:  the banks and businesses and factories and institutions that make money flow.  One dictionary defines it this way: “a political and economic theory of social organizationthat advocates that the means of production,distributionand exchange should be owned orregulated by the community as a whole.”

Whatever.  All I know is that if the “community” in this definition means “the Congress”, the “Courts”, and the “Executive” branch… we’re doomed.  I mean it.  Doomed.  I don’t care which party’s in office, that’s too much power for too few people.  

The Bible’s view on socialism can be summed up in four words:  YOU SHALL NOT STEAL.  (Exodus 20:15).  With that commandment, God enshrined the value of private property and delegated to the government the task of securing one’s property from seizure by anybody, including “the community.”    Including the king.

But we should have seen this coming.  The more we empower politicians, the more they fulfill Samuel’s warning:  

And he said, “This will be the behavior of the king who will reign over you: He will take your sons and appoint them for his own chariots and to be his horsemen, and some will run before his chariots. “He will appoint captains over his thousands and captains over his fifties, will set some to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and some to make his weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. “He will take your daughters to be perfumers, cooks, and bakers. “And he will take the best of your fields, your vineyards, and your olive groves, and give them to his servants. “He will take a tenth of your grain and your vintage, and give it to his officers and servants. “And he will take your male servants, your female servants, your finest young men, and your donkeys, and put them to his work. “He will take a tenth of your sheep. And you will be his servants. “And you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves, and the LORD will not hear you in that day.” Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, “No, but we will have a king over us, (1 Samuel 8:11-19, NKJV).

Count the number of “takes” in that paragraph. That’s the nature of all politicians, and that’s why our founders gave us a supposedly severely limited government.  Samuel advocated the same, but the people ignored him, and they suffered.  Why?  Because the people begged for a king, and a king they got.  Yikes.  Attention American People–quit begging for a king, okay?  Quit for the sake of our kids and grandkids, if not for yourself.

Our addiction to “foreign oil” isn’t our problem.  Our addiction to SOMEBODY ELSE’S MONEY is.

God help us.  God forgive us.  We treat the courts and the government like a gigantic lottery, and we keep voting for politicians in both parties who are all too ready to dole out somebody else’s cash.  

And for every Christian who says… Shouldn’t we be generous and giving?  Yes we should.  Absolutely.  But it is impossible for a government to be generous because it has no money of its own; only what it extracts by coercion from its citizens… and giving that away can’t be called “generosity” by any legitimate standard.  

Unless generosity is voluntary, it isn’t generosity.  

Socialism sounds good on paper for some (not for me), but it has an Achilles’ heel:  it fails to account for the fallenness of human nature, and its “Me First” Prime Directive.  Solzhenitzyn–a first hand victim of socialism–asked:

If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?

So I say, quit asking for a king.  And quit apologizing for property rights–and get your hand out of someone else’s wallet:  God told us not to steal, remember? 

I think it was Norman Vincent Peale who said, “Americans used to roar like lions for freedom; now they bleat like sheep for security.”

Oh… while I’m ranting, let’s clarify terms.  The Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac “bailout” wasn’t a “bailout.” It was an EXPANSION.  The very government run businesses that wrecked our economy were punished with… an unprecedented expansion.

And these are the very people we’re handing control of pretty much EVERYTHING to.  God help us.   

Expect a lot more “taking.”  

There’s hope though…  And only one hope:  

“Now, therefore,” says the LORD, “Turn to Me with all your heart, With fasting, with weeping, and with mourning.” So rend your heart, and not your garments; Return to the LORD your God, For He is gracious and merciful, Slow to anger, and of great kindness; And He relents from doing harm. Who knows if He will turn and relent, And leave a blessing behind Him– A grain offering and a drink offering For the LORD your God? (Joel 2:12-14, NKJV).

America… Bless God… and love your neighbor enough not to steal his/her hard earned money.


26 thoughts on “Socialism isn’t biblical

  1. America is either ignoring or surrendering to the destruction of the imminent socialist society that is taking away our freedom. Thank you for challenging us to speak up for the rights that God has bestowed upon us through His grace. Meek does not mean weak.

  2. Last I checked, Bill, (and I haven’t checked) you aren’t a political or economic theorist. Neither am I. Nor another friend I was talking to about this. And yet it is so friggin clear to all of us that what is being offered to us under the flowery guise of change, and the “patriotism of paying taxes” and “doing our part” is nothing less than socialism.

    But I don’t know what is more frustrating: one candidate running on this platform or the other one not calling him out on it. Why won’t someone in political leadership shout it. “It sounds so nice what the government wants to do with taxes, but it’s socialism.” Instead they hear the public repeat the Boxer refrain, “Napoleon is right,” and “I will work harder.” So, that’s where the votes are. And that’s how Animal Farm is established. And nothing changes.

    Did you hear what one of the main characters in this election said? I’ll not name the person for the sake of the blog’s neutrality. But the quote is, “I want to take money and give it to others.” I WANT TO TAKE MONEY. Go into a bank and say that. Then ask the nice officer to loosen the handcuffs so they aren’t so tight. But get yourself put on a presidential ticket and say that. If you win, you get to threaten other people with handcuffs if they think you are wrong. Either way, we, the general public, are cuffed. (Wink, wink)

    Forget about whether our founders were Christians. They weren’t, at least not professing by the time they were establishing the nation. Their concerns were primarily economic and political. They were capitalists. God used them greatly and our nation for the purposes of His kingdom. Obviously, He can use a socialist nation, too. I don’t feel there is anything wrong with us, as citizens, preferring Him to use our nation as a capitalist nation.

    Bill, I hope this blog is in your name, not the church’s name, so as to not threaten your church’s tax status.

  3. I’m torn, because I generally agree with the sentiment presented here, but there are some particulars that I’m not so comfortable with…

    In terms of the sentiment in general;
    Government (as construed by enlightenment liberals…wait, no, not those liberals. I mean “liberal” in the proper sense: concerned with liberty) is by nature coercive. The gist is that human beings are bound to be in conflict with one another in “state of nature.” So, what we do is create a (relative to the individuals) really big “state” that has the potential to wield a great deal of violence. That’s why they have police and military. The state’s potential for violence keeps the people’s individual potentials for violence at bay. Even elections fall under this heading; we engage in rhetorical combat so that (hopefully) we don’t fall into actual combat. Then, each citizen casts one ballot as a kind of abstracted “blow” against the opposing party.

    Violence keeping violence at bay; it’s not a great system. However, it might be about the best one human societies have ever come up with that didn’t involve obedience to the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Paul.

    So, yeah, the government, as an implement of potential violence is a) inherently coercive, hence Bill’s point above and b) really, really bad at providing what we might call “compassion services” or welfare services. If you don’t believe me, go ask Hurricane Katrina survivors. They aren’t likely to tell you how grateful they are to their government, whether local or federal.

    They might, on the other hand, tell you how great faith-based non-profits have been to them. hrmmm….. interesting.

    Socialism amounts to asking the government to do what it was never (at least, in our lifetimes) designed to do. They are going to fail and they are going to fail catastrophically. In fact, they already have. Ask the former residents of Cabrini Green in Chicago.

    Okay, but it wouldn’t be me if I didn’t have a few issues with the particulars:

    Bill wrote:

    Well, first, I’m glad he didn’t use the words “the RIGHT of private property.” God (so long as we’re talking about the Biblical God and not the deistic God of America’s founders and their philosophical fore-fathers) never gave us “rights.” Rights are what we call an “operating fiction.” Rights are one of the stories we tell ourselves so we can get along. As a lie-agreed-upon they work pretty well, but they are, in reality, made up.

    I really like the way Alasdair MacIntyre puts it: “Rights are like witches and unicorns. You can believe in them if you want, but it doesn’t make them real.”

    But our discussion of the VALUE of private property should probably be tempered by Genesis 1:26 and 28. God, in verse 28, says to “subdue” and “have dominion over” God’s material creation . This verse is often used to justify our consumerist behavior, but to do so is to misunderstand what the text is saying. We are to subdue and have dominion over creation in so far as we are made in the image of God, as expressed in verse 26. Our lordship over creation is predicated on our identity as the “image of God.” In other words, we ought to master creation in the way that we hope God will be Lord over us; with mercy, justice, care and love.

    If by “the value of private property” you mean “its MINE!” then I’m troubled by a biblical defense of such a “value.” However, if by “private property” you mean “It is MY responsibility,” then we’re getting closer.

    Maybe a clarifying example: You don’t “own” your children, but they are yours. You are responsible for them and you have a special concern and care for their well being that I, let’s say, do not. It’s not that I don’t love your children, think they’re great and don’t feel some responsibility for them. It is just that they, as YOUR kids, are primarily your department.

    So it is with our property, I think. We are in charge of some stuff for a while and it is ours to be responsible for. However, that doesn’t mean we get to do whatever we want with it and when God calls it out into His kingdom for some purpose, we have to let it go. Just like, some day, you will have to let your children go out into God’s Kingdom to serve and be used.

    Lastly, I sincerely believe that the reason that America is having to consider such a wildly bad idea as socialized health care is because the American church dropped the philanthropic ball a loooong time ago. There was a time when the church operated hospitals, orphanages, poor houses, etc as exercises in charity. Now they are being run as exercises in profit and people who need help are being left out in the cold.
    If you read John Calvin’s writing about the role of the church in the community, he’s really great on this: the church MUST be enacting it’s responsibilities to the widow, the orphan, the foreigner, or else its prophet (read: moral) voice is hushed and nearly silenced. It’s not legalism, its just our responsibility as those who have received God’s grace. It’s the “respons(e)” part of responsibility.


  4. You may not be an economic or political theorist, but it sure sounds like you have a whole bunch of common sense!!! Spot on!

    Our addiction to someone else’s money is way overboard! It gets extremely personal when it’s YOUR own money they want! (and don’t worry about a tax exemption status – you’re quoting Scripture to us and giving an opinion.)

    Thanks so much for echoing my heart’s plea: Oh, God help us!!!!

  5. Bill, Thank you for putting so well the conversation I seem to be having daily. Thank you especially for the hopeful conclusion. As Christians, we have a responsibility to be the light in this very dark kingdom, modeling God’s grace and speaking truth, even when it seems no one is getting it.

    Jonathan, I appreciate your comments about caring for our resources “in God’s image.” So true.

    In the meantime, I urge readers to vote for the presidential candidate who will best continue our free market system. If you hear the words, “Our government needs to…(fill in the blank as it pertains to solving any of our current social problems),” please run quickly to the other candidate! Our country is NOT our savior.

  6. Doc…

    I have to accuse you of shady practices!


    Of course Socialism isn’t Biblical. But it seems pretty misleading to make that statement without also stating Capitalism isn’t Biblical either!

    And I have to seriously question your eisegesis of the 8th commandment!

    The Jewish people lived in a playing field that God ordained to be leveled every 50 years! Hardly a blazing endorsement of Capitalism or even private property rights as we currently understand them.

    This is my whole problem with Christians and politics. We use rhetoric that condemns our political opponents as somehow ‘unbiblical’ for having the audacity to hold political view that are inconvenient to us. There needs to be room for Christians to disagree with each other on political issues without playing the ‘heretic’ card.

    We should be willing to acknowledge that political systems and issues are rarely black and white, and that there are a plethora of valid ways of governing that we could call ‘Christian’ even though they might be incompatible with each other.

    And as an aside Pastor, it seems like your words above put you in the position of denying the validity of government at all? If any and all taxation is evil and condemned outright by Almighty God (in the 8th Commandment specifically), then I presume you are against publicly funded schooling, police and fire departments, road maintenance, and military forces? Which of course, begs the question, do you use these ill-gotten goods and services, and if so, does that implicate you in the evil?


    After all, I have never heard of any major candidates of either party who were against socialized education, socialized law enforcement, etc. We have never been a truly Capitalistic society, and I don’t think we would enjoy it very much if we were! Then you would really have too much power in the hands of too few people!

    And I, even more, would love to hear your thoughts on NT Wright!

  7. Bill…

    The welfare system was a major part of God’s law in the Bible. I say “major” because this welfare system was based on loving your neighbor as yourself.

    In the Hebrew Bible we find the commandment to leave sheaves in the field for the widows, the poor, and the orphans (Lev 19:9-10; 23:22; Deut 14:29; 24:19-20).

    In the book of Ruth, the kinsman redeemer (Boaz) came to meet his future wife (Ruth) because of this welfare system. That is, Ruth received her “welfare check” from the fields of Boaz. Boaz came to know her. In fact, Boaz went the extra mile, and left extra welfare checks in the fields for the poor. He received a double portion when he married Ruth. I could mention the “Jubilee” system or even the system of tithes for the Levitical priesthood, but you get the idea.

    No matter how you slice it, the result is the same: i.e., state-sponsored welfare. If we assume that the Mosaic Law was a reflection of the character of God (valuing of people over objects), then we as Christians must reconsider the concept of “welfare” and “socialism.” I know that you are aware that many “ante-bellum” abolitionists of the 19th century were “Christian socialists” in the purest sense. The cascade result of their voices was the end of slavery, but not without civil war.

    I do not disagree agree with you, but I would challenge you to a more moderate view.


  8. Oh boy, here we go again.

    Bill, does this mean that I have to be held accountable for myself and that the gov’t shouldn’t pay for me to have kids, not have a job (due to lack of looking for one), live an unhealthy life style or be irresponsible with my money? I’m not sure if I’m ready for this. I like the coddling thing were I don’t have to think or work for myself. It’s safer and less work. Does McDonalds take food stamps?

    I agree with your one hope. It is the hope that I always come back to after forgetting that I really stink at taking control over my own life and it never fails!!! With that being said I am going to go spend some time with Him. Be blessed and I look forward to seeing you Sunday.

  9. Steve

    Do you pay stores and service providers only the amount that will allow them to break even? Or do you pay them the amount that gives them a profit, too? Does that implicate you in the evil that is capitalism?
    One of the problems with Christians and debate is when one party tells the other what to say, like when an overly big government tells us what to do with our own time, treasure, and talents for the social welfare.
    Bill doesn’t need me to defend him, and would be better off without it, but I think he’d rather be condemned by some person than to be flippantly accused of eisegesis. That was way out of line.

  10. Steve, Steve… a misreading and misrepresentation of several things. Yes, the government has a biblical mandate to collect taxes and enforce laws, and no I do not advocate anarchy. That was a low blow.

    You are not correct that God ordained the playing field to be leveled very fifty years. Wrong. Slaves were set free, and property returned to its ancestral owners every fifty years. That didn’t “level” the playing field–a telling choice of words on your part. There were huge disparities in wealth, and in personal property, and the 8th commandment forbade anybody from stealing that wealth.

    So, yes, there is plenty of room for governments to fund their legitimate purposes. You probably see more purposes as legitimate than I do. So be it.

    I have taught on Ruth many times, it is one of my favorite books in the Bible. I am quite familiar with the laws of gleaning; they stipulated that farmers had to be inefficient in harvesting their crops. They couldn’t pick up dropped grain, couldn’t harvest the corners of their fields, and couldn’t pass thru a row twice to harvest. At the end of the day, widows, aliens, and the impoverished had a legal right to go and harvest dropped grain for themselves. They then had to process it (winnow and grind and cook it) to feed themselves. That’s a very gracious provision of God, and much less like welfare than like workfare, but let’s not quibble over words.

    I am pro-police and fire departments and publicly funded roads, and I see an argument for public education… but I am also pro- politicians obeying the written laws of our land.

    I did not commit eisegesis. I’d put your comment about leveling the playing field in that category. The 8th commandment, and many other Scriptures, require respect for one another and for one another’s property:
    a. Do not remove the ancient landmark [property corners] Which your fathers have set. (Proverbs 22:28, NKJV).
    b. Do you see a man who excels in his work? He will stand before kings; He will not stand before unknown men. (Proverbs 22:29, NKJV).
    c. ‘Cursed is the one who moves his neighbor’s landmark.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ (Deuteronomy 27:17, NKJV).
    d. etc…

    If you read any of this and say, “He’s against compassion ministry for the poor,” I’ll have to reach thru the internet and bop you on the head.

    If anybody’s rhetoric condemned their opponent (as heretical, no less), it’s the rhetoric that says, “it seems like your words above put you in the position of denying the validity of government at all? If any and all taxation is evil and condemned outright by Almighty God [who ever said that?] (in the 8th Commandment specifically), then I presume you are against publicly funded schooling, police and fire departments, road maintenance, and military forces? Which of course, begs the question, do you use these ill-gotten goods and services, and if so, does that implicate you in the evil?” Ummm… whose condemnatory rhetoric was that?


  11. Joe…
    I appreciate your spirit and your use of Scripture, but it is not socialism in view. One can advocate a form of capitalism and still not be a Scrooge. Scrooge, in fact, represents a distortion of healthy capitalism, in which employers pay a living wage, respect the environment, and still make a profit for their shareholders (read, our grandmothers and grandfathers…).

    As I said in my comment to Steve, the biblical system is less like welfare (you stay home, and I’ll mail you a check) than like workfare (go to the fields and glean).

    The kinsman redeemer laws are more social, to prevent the name of the clan from disappearing, though there is an economic element.

    In any case, no matter how compassionate God’s laws are, and they are very compassionate, there is no biblical warrant for GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION, and other socialist ideas.

    Socialism isn’t biblical.


  12. The biggest assumption I see underlying all of the particular arguments put forward by steve/joe/matt above is that the care of poor and the needy ought to be done through and by the nation state and its subsidiary governments.

    but why should our secular government enact your particular, religious moral commitment to serving the poor and needy and outcast?

    Isn’t that, after all, your/our/the church’s job?

  13. Not I, Jonathan. Reread my comments here and under Bill’s post about being proud to be an American a few weeks back. I believe the government has some responsibilities the citizenry can’t do for itself, such as defense. My comment about capitalism being evil was meant to be sarcastic. Sorry if that didn’t come through.
    I agree with your comment that certain social ills not being made better could be laid at the feet of the church. But even if the church was able to and did respond to 100% of its ability, the world would still be a fallen place with all the attendant evils.

    I never apologize if someone calls me a Scrooge. It just means they didn’t read the whole book. I give them this quote:

    Scrooge was better than his word. He did it all, and infinitely more; and to Tiny Tim, who did not die, he was a second father. He became as good a friend, as good a master, and as good a man, as the good old city knew, or any other good old city, town, or borough, in the good old world.

  14. ah, yes, I misunderstood, matt. I’ll blame it on the fact that I’m reading 3 hours later out here in boston. It’s now quite early in the morning and I ought to be in bed!!

    Thanks for clarifying.

  15. How about this, Socialism is not American! And God is not American either. God blessed American 200+ years ago, He may be finished. The country as a whole-government has indeed forsaken Him.

    At least in the town I live in, our so called “poor”, among them I would say 90% smoke, have cable television, (which can add up to …not being poor) and are more than willing to sign up for socialism. Our country has created a sense of entitlement that I hate to think is incurable.
    25 year olds expect to buy a $500k house as their first home. The “hard work and saving for what you want” thought process is for the most part obsolete. People think Socialism is the answer, without knowing what it will really mean.

  16. Hey Doc,

    Correct me if I am wrong, but you quoted the 8th Commandment as a summary condemnation of the government taxing it citizens:

    “The Bible’s view on socialism can be summed up in four words: YOU SHALL NOT STEAL. (Exodus 20:15). With that commandment, God enshrined the value of private property and delegated to the government the task of securing one’s property from seizure by anybody, including “the community.” Including the king.”

    If you meant something else by that, fair enough, but I still can’t read the above quote as anything other than an outright ban on all taxation. Help me out…

    And I will grant you that the Jubilee land-redistribution project was not a total and complete equalization of all wealth in the country, but I don’t know what else you would call it but ‘leveling the playing field!’
    (I don’t know what exactly that phrase tells you, but you’re better off asking instead of assuming.) There simply isn’t a one-to-one correlation between the economic system of the Torah and either Socialism or Capitalism.

    And, I don’t quite see how the section you quote from me is in any way ‘condemnatory?’ I don’t condemn anything you say in that quote. I simply ask how your application of the 8th Commandment (as a ban on governments taking citizens money ie a tax) works out in practical terms.

    Jonathan and Matt A (and Bill too):

    I never said Capitalism was evil, nor did I endorse Socialism, nor did I argue for public welfare. Which is a big part of my point, if I challenge you, then I must be your enemy (intellectually speaking at least), why assume I am a Socialist, can’t I simply be someone who doesn’t want to ‘throw rocks’ at Socialists?

    My point is more about the rhetoric than anything else. If my satire didn’t come through so well, I apologize, but I don’t have a problem with Capitalism, in and of itself, it just simply isn’t Biblical. I approach it the same way I do Socialism, lets evaluate it as a system and see what good it can and cannot deliver on. I just get frustrated by the way Christians approach politics, (all people approach politics this way, but Christians ought to take the lead in speaking with grace and love in the public arena), whenever people disagree they are automatically ‘un-Christian.’ Instead of perhaps someone who is extremely committed to the cause of Christ, and just sees things differently!

    Case in point, I agree with Bill’s statement that “there is no biblical warrant for GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION,” but don’t we also (for the sake of full disclosure) have to say that there is no biblical warrant for private control of the means of production? And shouldn’t we evaluate these two ways of ordering our economy on their merits, instead of accusing people of being ‘godless communists?’

    ” I’ll have to reach thru the internet and bop you on the head.”


    You’re finally startin’ to figure me out Bill.


  17. Steve,

    I hope you’re not assuming we’re capitalists. But with your logic, why am I not allowed to assume you’re a socialist, but you can assume I see you as my enemy? All this “assuming” zooming around me, is making me loony. But if you don’t like what I assume, then you can, aaah…sue me.

    On a more serious note, all the straw men you’re setting out are making Bill’s blog a fire hazard. Nobody said any of the things you bring up. Nobody called anybody godless, or un-christian. Neither is anyone throwing rocks.

    I do agree that the Bible doesn’t endorse any one economic theory. The Bible does endorse private property and free will voluntary giving and support of social causes. But I don’t think either Adam Smith or Karl Marx were doing a Bible study when they wrote their works.

    My main problem with American political leaders moving us toward socialism is that it betrays our American system. Like it or not, for good or evil, our economy was set up on a capitalistic basis. Whether it is biblical was irrelevant to the founding fathers. It is a foundational part of our nation. To move us from that is nothing short of revolutionary.

    Let me save you the effort. I know, there were foundational elements to our system that were evil. For example, slavery, as practiced in America, (and elsewhere), was cruel and unbiblical. It had to go, unfortunately by force. But even slavery would have ended by the twentieth century as technology, market forces, and world opinion would have rendered it unnecessary. I don’t at all mean to advocate that we should have waited for these things to take effect. It would also be cruel for a white person to tell another race that they should have been patient. But slavery had to stop because it was inherently evil. Capitalism is not.

    I am flabbergasted that you want to evaluate socialism to see what it can deliver on. The Soviet Union is gone. Its “replacement,” Russia, is in ruins due in part to what socialism did to it. It is also suffering from an extreme negative population growth rate, as people leave a country that is having all sorts of problems recovering from its former economic/political system. Cuba, one of the lone holdouts of the Soviet system, is a mess. They have to keep their people there by force. I fear China more now than I did when it was a completely totalitarian regime. With all those people, and another billion and a half just over the border in India, I don’t know how we can compete economically. They will beat us at our own game. The only thing socialism can deliver is the world on a silver platter back to capitalism.

  18. Steve: What ever happened to Christian “unity” in your mind…..?

    What I have read from you from the beginning of this blog has been most antagonistic. Where’s the Christian love for one another? You seem to always just want to “win” an argument. Too much debater in your blood, me thinks.

  19. Dear MaxGrace:

    Well – Since you are looking for feedback!

    The bailout and the actions of the G7 while not ideal, are in truth the only choice other than a real, old style deppression. With proper intervention we could possibly get out of this and back on track in a year or two. It is the lesser of two evils: Just like our political choices this election.

    As far as socialism and christianity I have to tell you that I believe it is pretty low on God’s list of concerns. There are plenty of christians in countries such as Canada who are happy with their political system and don’t know that they are mistaken.

    If we are looking towards the bible for an example of government shouldn’t we be seeking a Monarchy? That’s what we all to get to in the end…..

    Personally (I am sure this will be no suprise) I support Libertariansim, the best government is the least government. But the truth is that none of the parties have a corner on the truth, they adapt their arguments to support their beliefs. Their ultimate concern is always the continuation of their own power. If I am to error I will always choose to error on the side of the poor, the have nots, those who cannot protect themselves from the world’s powerbrokers. That is who Jesus served by example.

    I am not saying that your writings do this, I am only speaking about the politicians and their parties, none of them are perfect — not even one.

    Concerning the citizens becoming sheep like (sheeple) remember the words of our founding fathers: “Those who would give up liberty for security have neither.”

  20. I can’t lay my hands on it, but there’s an appropriate quote from T.S. Eliot’s “Choruses from the Rock”:

    . . . the error built in the blood,
    dreaming of systems so perfect
    that no one will have to be good.

Comments are closed.