Rss

  • youtube

Work

A few years ago before my mother passed away at age 79, we were talking about life on the family dairy farm when my brothers and I were kids. For those that don’t know, a dairy farm is a seven-day-a-week job with long hours, and as kids we thought everyone worked like that. Teasingly, I told my mother that if I knew then what I know now, I would have reported her and my father for child abuse! We both had a good laugh. While my brothers and I may not have appreciated it when we were children and teenagers, the instilled work ethic molded us, shaped our characters, and made possible the joys and blessings of life.

However, as our nation staggers toward the looming welfare state, work has become just another profane four-letter word. The denigration of work has been around for thousands of years and flourished in the classical civilizations of Greece and Rome in which physical work was considered demeaning to all except slaves and the lower classes. In ancient Athens, one-third of freemen sat daily discussing the affairs of state in the court of Comitia as slaves, who outnumbered citizens five-to-one, performed all manual labor. In the “bread and circuses” pleasure-seeking Roman culture, it was again slaves who did all of the manual labor. [Schmidt, pp. 194-195.]

But during the first century, at the eastern edge of the Mediterranean, a child was born that would give voice to God’s view of the dignity of labor. His name was Jesus, the promised Messiah. His early disciples were mostly callus-handed fishermen, tradesmen, and even a local IRS agent. And the arch-persecutor-turned-apostle of this tiny Christian sect was a brilliant theologian and evangelist but also a tent-maker by trade. And the Apostle Paul admonished the Thessalonian Christians that, “If any one will not work, let him not eat.” [2 Thessalonians 3:10. RSV] It was in the first century that Christians were driven from their homeland and made their first appearances in the Greco-Roman world. Because Christians believed in the dignity and honor of work, they were held with contempt by their Roman masters. Persecution arose, in part, because those strange Christian beliefs about work conflicted with the Romans’ view of the world and also because of suspicions and jealousies of the Christians’ prosperity due to their strong work ethic. [Schmidt, pp. 195-196.]

But the first century Christian view of work was not a new philosophy but a reflection of the image of the Creator stamped on man, the pinnacle of His creation. Biblical instruction and admonitions regarding work are abundant. The first chapter of Genesis records God’s labors in creating the universe. Not only does God work, He charged man with responsibilities and duties of being fruitful, replenishing and subduing the earth, and having dominion over all living creatures. When Adam and Eve were driven from the Garden of Eden because of their sin, God told Adam that “…cursed is the ground because of you; in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life…In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground…” [Genesis 3: 17, 19. RSV] Notice that God did not impose work as a punishment for their sin. Rather, the curse was on the ground upon which they would toil. In other words, the curse was upon the conditions under which the work would be performed, not on work itself. But God loved man and would make possible a way for man to re-enter right relationship with Him by sending His Son Jesus in human form as a babe. Perhaps this gives us another insight into God’s view of work in that the earthly father of God’s Son was a carpenter.

With the decline and fall of the western half of the Roman Empire by the end of the fifth century, a remnant of the Christian heritage of the western portion of the Roman Empire was pushed northward into the sparse and hostile forests of France and western Germany. The inhabitants were Gauls whom the Romans had conquered and brought civilization at the beginning of the Christian era. To this group was added a smaller number of Teutonic invaders that had come from the East and hindered for a time the building of an organized social life and assimilation of the Mediterranean culture. Life was harsh in the pioneer wilds of northern Europe at the beginning of the Middle Ages around A.D. 500. However, out of this difficult and meager existence was built a cohesive and somewhat refined civilization, and the broad and general characteristics of their medieval society remained for centuries. Those characteristics and viewpoint, worldview if you will, became the ideas and ideals of Christendom which were the foundations of the American experience from the earliest colonial days to the middle of the twentieth century. [Johnson, p. 88.]

Christendom’s creedal reverence for work and the practical necessity of work amidst primitive conditions in the forests and clearings of early Europe produced the phenomenon of the middle class, unknown before the advent of Christianity and now present in all of Western civilization. With the birth of the middle class came the reduction of poverty and its attendant disease. And from the middle class arose political and economic freedom of a magnitude unknown in the history of the world to that time. [Schmidt, pp. 198-199.]

In the very earliest years of Europeans on the American continent, socialistic answers were sought to replace the Christian work ethic as the North Star for organizing society. Because of their isolation from the civilized world, Jamestown and the Plymouth Colony stand as great laboratory experiments regarding questions as to the validity and worthiness of socialistic principles. Communism of an almost pure variety, in the isolated and controlled environment of the New World, failed miserably in its initial years as laziness and inefficiency trumped thrift and industry. As the colonists abandoned their experiment in socialism, the colonies flourished. [Johnson, p. 247.] Karl Marx’s ideas regarding socialism presented in The Communist Manifesto became the twentieth century’s grand socialist experiment which led to the enslavement of a third of humanity behind the iron and bamboo curtains. For three quarters of a century, the consequences of these socialistic systems were death and misery unparalleled in the history of mankind.

But our collective memory is short and socialism’s propaganda machine is strong. As a result Christianity and its values are being rapidly abandoned in Western societies in favor of a humanistic worldview requiring socialistic solutions to society’s problems. As a result, socialism is destroying the middle class and its indispensable Christian work ethic, and America is becoming a bread and circuses culture.

The displacement of the work ethic by the actions of the American government’s social engineers since the 1960s has had a multitude of far-reaching consequences. Just one example is the humanistic welfare solutions that have fractured the concept of family by substituting governmental assistance to unwed pregnant teenage girls. Fathers are not required to work and provide for the mother and child for whom they are responsible. This welfare system perpetuates itself through ensuing generations that repeat the cycle. The direct consequences of institutionalization of illegitimacy in American life are a rise in the illegitimacy rate (6% in 1963 to 41% in 2014) and consequent increases in drug use rate, dropout rate, crime rate, and incarceration rate. [Buchanan, p. A-14.

In the mid-1990s Congressional welfare reforms required those seeking welfare to work. However, this requirement was removed by an executive order by President Obama in 2012. Additionally, governmental subsidies provided by the Affordable Care Act have now been determined to be a disincentive to work by those receiving subsidies with a consequent loss of 2.5 million jobs over the next three years according to a Congressional Budget Office report. [Carruthers]

The operation of man’s fallen human nature exposes the soft and rotten underbelly of the tenets of the socialism and humanistic faith in mankind and their commitment to the principle of the greatest-happiness-for-the-greatest-number which humanists consider to be the highest moral obligation for humanity as a whole. [Johnson, p. 247.] The operation of human nature conflicts with man-made socialistic solutions to the problems of life, and the end result is failure. People fail, families fail, and cultures ultimately fail. The socialists’ false view of man’s nature leads to poverty, starvation, and loss of freedom. The antidote is a rejection of socialism and a return to the Christian work ethic.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

Alvin J. Schmidt, How Christianity Changed the World,” (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2004), pp. 194-196, 198-199.

Larry G. Johnson, Ye shall be as gods – Humanism and Christianity – The Battle for Supremacy in the American Cultural Vision, (Owasso, Oklahoma: Anvil House Publishers, 2011), pp. 88, 247.

Patrick Buchanan, “Is this end of the line for the welfare state?” Tulsa World, February 12, 2014, A-14.

Wanda Carruthers, “Joe Scarborough: CBO Report Shows Obamacare ‘Still Red Hot Mess’,” Newsmax.com, February 6, 2014. http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/cbo-work-obamacare-disincentive/2014/02/06/id/551246#ixzz2tEpiNt4b (accessed February 13, 2014).

The New Despotism – Part II

In Part I we learned that humanistic definitions of equality have played a central role in the ascendance of a new despotism in America. About 175 years ago, Tocqueville gave a vivid picture of this new type of oppression that would threaten democracies and which “…will not be like anything there has been in the world before…” He admitted that he was having trouble naming this new despotism but “wished to imagine under what new features despotism might appear in the world”:

I see an innumerable crowd of men, all alike and equal, turned in upon themselves in a restless search for those petty, vulgar pleasures with which they fill their souls…Above these men stands an immense and protective power which alone is responsible for looking after their enjoyments and watching over their destiny. It is absolute, meticulous, ordered, provident, and kindly disposed. It would be like a fatherly authority, if, father-like, its aim were to prepare men for manhood, but it seeks only to keep them in perpetual childhood; it prefers its citizens to enjoy themselves provided they have only enjoyment in mind. It works readily for their happiness but it wishes to be the only provider and judge of it. It provides their security, anticipates and guarantees their needs, supplies their pleasures, directs their principal concerns, manages their industry, regulates their estates, divides their inheritances. Why can it not remove from them entirely the bother of thinking and the troubles of life?

Thus, it reduces daily the value and frequency of the exercise of free choice; it restricts the activity of free will within a narrower range and gradually removes autonomy itself from each citizen. Equality has prepared men for all this, inclining them to tolerate all these things and often see them as a blessing.

Thus, the ruling power, having taken each citizen one by one into its powerful grasp and having molded him to its own liking, spreads it arms over the whole of society, covering the surface of social life with a networked of petty, complicated, detailed, and uniform rules through which even the most original minds and the most energetic of spirits cannot reach the light in order to rise above the crowd. It does not break men’s wills but it does soften, bend, and control them; rarely does it force man to act but it constantly opposes what actions they perform; it does not destroy the start of anything but it stands in its way; it does not tyrannize but it inhibits, represses, drains, snuffs out, dulls so much effort that finally it reduces each nation to nothing more than a flock of timid and hardworking animals with the government as shepherd.

The word Tocqueville was searching for in describing this new despotism was socialism, and his words have painted a prophetic and hauntingly real picture of the United States in the 21st century under the humanists’ leadership in the institutions of American life: government, education, economics, the sciences (physical, biological, and social), popular culture, and the family. Socialism is the end result of a society that pushes towards the humanist worldview of which the humanists’ definition of equality is central.

Why does humanism require a society organized under socialistic principles? First, socialism is a prerequisite for a humanist society. It is a cardinal tenet of the Humanist Manifesto I of 1933 which says: “A socialized and cooperative economic order must be established to the end that the equitable distribution of the means of life be possible.” For the humanist, equitable distribution means re-distribution and redistribution means socialism. Second, if one examines humanism and its goals, those goals can only be achieved through the imposition of a socialistic system of controls because the fundamental nature of man conflicts with the humanistic worldview. Being created in the image of God and given a free will, humans have an innate thirst for freedom which socialism suppresses.

The restrictions of the humanist society are decided by the social engineers of that society, the elites or “conditioners” as C. S. Lewis called them. Thus, humanism is a top down affair. Its leaders determine what is best for the masses based on man’s laws, not God’s laws. Socialism is humanism’s default setting for organizing society and is inherently domineering, restrictive, and restraining in the details of life and ultimately leads to loss of freedom in every aspect of life.

In a society built upon the biblical worldview, men join together and voluntarily limit their freedom. But the imposition of limits comes from a group of like-minded individuals whose central cultural vision reflects the same biblical worldview of freedom and the nature of man.

In concluding his description of the new despotism, Tocqueville stated that, “The vices of those who govern and the ineptitude of those governed would soon bring it (the nation) to ruin and the people, tired of its representatives and of itself, would create freer institutions or would soon revert to its abasement to one single master.” Given the apparent abdication by Congress of its designated role in the separation of powers and the proclivity of the Executive Branch in disabusing the judiciary, ignoring enforcement of the laws passed by Congress, and governing through illegitimate executive orders and presidential whim, it appears that America, through the ineptitude of the electorate, has chosen its abasement through one single master.

It’s time for pushback.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

Paul Kurtz, ed., Humanist Manifestos I and II, (Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, 1973), p. 10.

Alexis De Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Gerald E. Bevan, Trans., (London, England: Penguin Books, 2003), pp. 805-806, 808.

The New Despotism – Part I

Equality is a good thing. Right? Your first reaction may be, “Of course it is. It‘s even in the Declaration of Independence… ‘All men are created equal’.” But let’s give a little more thought and consideration to this topic. Do you really want your doctor to be equal to all other doctors? Do you want the airline pilot on whose plane you are a passenger to be equal with all other airline pilots? Of course not! You want your doctor to be the best doctor available when dealing with your health and that of your family. The same goes for the airline pilot on whose plane you are a passenger. So, we can’t just worship at the shrine of equality and say that equality in everything is good as so much of society seems to be doing these days.

In the culture wars, both sides support equality but have fundamentally different notions about what equality means and how it should be implemented and administered in all institutions of American life. One understanding of the meaning of equality has contributed to the United States becoming the most exceptional nation in the history of the world. The other meaning is contributing significantly to the disintegration of American culture as envisioned by the Founders.

Now, I don’t want your eyes to glaze over as you think about the concept of equality. This is not an academic exercise because a correct understanding of equality will help you determine on which side of the culture war you stand and allow you to recognize and defend the meaning of equality as understood by the Founders in establishing this nation and designing our Constitution.

We begin with an abbreviated summation of the meaning of equality. Here we speak of equality in light of the individual within the Founders’ meaning on the one hand versus the meaning as defined by the humanist levelers of the 21st century.

The founding Americans held a biblical worldview and relied on order that rested upon a respect for prescriptive rights and customs as opposed to the egalitarian notions of the French philosophers during the French Revolution. This difference was made clear by John Adams’ definition of equality which strikes at the heart of what it really means—a moral and political equality only—by which is meant equality before God and before the law. This definition does not teach that all men are born to equal powers, mental abilities, influence in society, property, and other advantages. Rather, all men are born to equal rights before God and the law and by implication to enjoy equal opportunity.

The humanistic definition of equality is clearly stated in Humanist Manifesto II’s eleventh common principle, “The principle of moral equality must be furthered…This means equality of opportunity…” But, the humanists’ meaning of “equal opportunity” is immediately and drastically corrupted to mean an equality of outcome as measured by humanist requirements. To further clarify the intent of the signors of the Manifesto, the document states that, “If unable [by means of equal opportunity], society should provide means to satisfy their basic economic, health, and cultural needs, including whatever resources make possible, a minimum guaranteed annual income.” This concept of human equality flows from the flawed humanistic assumption of the perfectibility of man. Under this concept, what men are comes from experience. Therefore, men are equal at birth, and differences and inequalities arise due to environment.

The goal of humanists was to achieve an egalitarian society (and eliminate inequalities due to environment) through political means in which man, achieving perfect equality in their political rights, would at the same time be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions. When humanists failed to achieve equality of outcome through political equality, the levelers demanded economic democracy, a new and expanded humanist definition of equality. However, economic democracy still means an equality of condition as opposed to equality of opportunity and is to be achieved through recognition of invented or synthetic rights coupled with broad but non-specific egalitarian ideals. As society is leveled with guarantees of certain outcomes to its citizens, political equality suffers, that is, imposed equality of outcome will destroy equality before the law.

We see evidence of the humanistic definition of equality being imposed on every institution of American life and the ensuing erosion of equality before the law. On an almost 24/7 basis we see and hear media reports from the battle fronts of the culture wars with regard to issues of perceived inequality including gay marriage, universal health care, women in combat roles, immigration, race, and employment. Some are issues dealing with equality before the law (excluding laws based on synthetic or invented rights), and the nation has and is promoting equality in those areas (e.g., race and employment discrimination). But even in those legitimate areas of concern, humanist organizations, politicians, and bureaucrats push the envelope beyond equality of opportunity.

Democracies are under grave and severe attack by a new despotism. Humanistic definitions of equality have played a central role in the ascendance of this despotism. In Part II we shall name this despotism and diagnose its operation and impact on the nation.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

Larry G. Johnson, Ye shall be as gods – Humanism and Christianity – The Battle for Supremacy in the American Cultural Vision, (Owasso, Oklahoma: Anvil House Publishers, 2011), pp. 394-395.

Paul Kurtz, ed., Humanist Manifestos I and II, (Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, 1973), p. 20.