Fabian Socialism and the Fight for American Ideals

I was just looking up Fabian Socialism tonight. You should look it up, it is alarming! Fabian socialists believe in a "soft" revolution of our economic and political systems, which is happening right before our eyes. The FS mantra is "selflessness", in the name of social justice and for the 'common good". I agree that most of us in the West need to learn to defer, at times, but not lay over and die! Individuality, choice, freedom and justice are not just terms that have no meaning for the "common", but was used to protect the "common". That is the basis of our democracy. That concept of protection of the common is changing. Paternalism is alive and well. Welcome to the world of the Fabian socialist!

There was one commentary, when I googled, on Obama that was insightful and informative, of his tactics. This person was brought up by a grandfather who was a Fabian socialist. He will and is playing on propagandizing the "public good" . He inherited $700 billion in assests in our banks. And he wants to herald in health care, which he will not do outright, as that would be too blatant of the ultimate goal, complete and total take-over of the health care industry. It will be done by starving the private sector. No business can survive without incentives, which are benefits for staying in business. If government makes so many demands upon business, then motivation, morale, and money all suffer.

Healthcare is only one area of government control. We already have partial nationalization of our banking industry. They want to enlarge big government and make people dependent on government and not take self-responsibility.

I am gravely concerned, as many are not even aware of what is happening, but when they become aware, I am afraid it will be too late. Fabian Socialism is an elitist way of breeding co-operation of the peasant class.

Human rights will no longer be forefront and center, as it will be deemed special priviledge for those who are educated beyond the "common". And the dangerous aspect about all of it is that elitism was the rationale for Hitler to do "away" with the "inferior person". Inferior persons cease to have rights, because they don't measure up to the standard of elitism.

Fabian Socialist are the "Third Way" to attain approval from those whose lives will ultimately depend upon them. Fabian socialist are deemed to be the social engineers, the revolutionaries in reformer's clothing. Fabian Socialist will breed unity around our "common crisis", defend the need to do "major surgury" on our economy, then call for sacrifice for the "common good", while wielding the power of the media to control and educate the public "for their own sake" and for the interests of the nation. We see all of this happening before our eyes.

This is nothing other than public economic scourging. And the demise of our great nation will be the result.

Last Night's Movie

Last night due to our son's recommendation, we watched 'The Changling'. It was about a single depression-era Mom loosing her son, and her attempt to recover him.

The experiences that she had with law enforcement officers reminds one of corruption "methods" wherever they are found in the world. The innocent suffer because others seek to protect thier reputations, "pad their pockets", or circumvent their "mistakes". In this case, it was the LAPD (Los Angeles Police Department).

One begins to understand what some suffer due to those in power whose characters leave something to be desired. In fact, this movie shows to what extinct those in power will seek to protect themselves, while condemning others. A mother and son's relationship is one that most can identify with and Angelina Jolie and the rest of the "stars" did a fantastic job performing their parts.

The scary thing is, that this was a true story. The corruption of those who were meant to protect is not experienced by most Americans. And I will not spoil the movie for those who might want to see it, in describing how justice was served. But, it was something that makes the heart soar to see "right" win.

What I Have Come to Believe About Love.

I really think that most of my life I have been a "romantic". Romanticism is a child-like belief in "love". Love conquers all. All the world needs now is "love sweet love". Love will make everything all right. If one just learns to love enough, then others will love in return. These are childish imaginings, built on a childish hope for "peace and goodwill to all men"..l

I have come to understand that "love" is not the exchange rate of life in this world and humans don't Love unless they know. Love is a personal word, unlike justice.

Justice is an aspect of love that seeks equality under law, respect, dignity, and value to all people. Justice is blind to difference, because difference in race, religion or "creed of life" are not evaluated in "justice's eyes". Justice is what anyone seeks for "self" and what we need to seek for others. But, justice is measured by law, as laws define and protect justice. Love fulfills the law, because love will not break the law in regards to another's difference of value or choice. Justice is moral because it seeks to give freedom for choice.

While justice is the side to love that is universal, mercy is the side that is personal. Mercy is shown in tangible ways to those whose needs vary. Mercy is not blind, as it sees clearly what the needs are and seeks to meet them. Mercy gives freedom, because it respects another's need for dignity in private moments of despair and discouragement. Mercy reaches out. but doesn't demand to serve or demean in service. Mercy is respectful.

Love is not romanticized in these values of justice or mercy. Justice and mercy seek to alleviate pain, benefit the whole and rectify the wrong.

While I have given up hope for romanticized love, in happily ever afters, as there are no "ever afters". I haven't given up on justice or mercy. While mercy doesn't appeal to me as much now, as justice once didn't in the past, I have come to understand and appreciate justice above all, as I have understood the importance of distinctions, values, and the history of our country. I have become fascinated by things that once were cold hard facts. Now, I live and love history.

I am grateful for my country and the values of freedom and justice for all, as I believe these are values that all people should experience, but most do not. I am so grateful to live in the land of the free and the home of the brave, that seeks to rectify the differences of experiencing freedom and justice for all.

Senator Judd Gregg Appears Tonight on TV

Senator Judd Gregg was on TV tonight. He has turned down Obama for the Secretary of Commerce. He said he turned down the position after he considered his commitment to fisical conservatism. He did not think that this administration was on the "same page" and he thought that he would not have much to offer because of these differences. Hurray for him, for having the integrity to stick by his convictions and not compromise his beliefs! And then, to state them so emphatically on TV.

The U.S. debt is to reach 1.7 trillion dollars, which will hinder our next generation and generations to come. I think that Sen. Gregg was acting responsibly because he remained true to his values and personal commitments. More politicians should do the same.

I wonder how the 'greater good" people would have seen or argued against his individual commitment to his own values at the expense of the adminstration's. Some in blogosphere have been writing against individualism and independence. I find that this thinking is very misguided, as it leads to brainlessness. Independence and individualism doesn't have to mean rebellion or revolution, but some suppose that those who resist, rather than submit are obviously rebellious. Perhaps so.

I am not arguing against social structures or our needs for them, as all of us need context, but I am arguing against depending on them to the extent of giving up one's own values or identity. Ethics is an evaluation of values. And those who argue against the individual are suggesting that "suspending the ethical" is what is for the "best" or the "greater good". How can this be?

These bloggers used Abraham as the suggested "model" of right behavior. These bloggers suggest that faith is "leaping against reason", in sacrificing Issac. Not only is this not reasonable, but it is presumptuous.

The sacrifice of Issac is understood theologically as symbolic representation of the redemption of Jesus. And it is suggested by some that it is a "model" to "test" for "absolute surrender", as Issac was the Promise of god to Abraham, and yet, Abrahma was willing the sacrifice his promised son to prove his obedience at all costs. This was a test for idolatry of heart, at least this is the theologian's interpretation.

The aforementioned theological interpretation is not written in the text, but is interpreted by the NT theologizing. It is not the ethical that God demands, but the outrageously "abnormal". This is considered true spirituality, going against reason, jumping in the dark, taking a leap of faith, etc.

This is not a realistic view of life. Take Senator Gregg, for instance, if he suspended his rational judgment and took a leap of faith, then he would have taken the position Obama offered him, irregardless of Obama's ideological differences. He would have understood that to "walk by faith" would be the "costs" of setting aside his fisical convictions, as these are reasoned, and in opposition to "faith" in taking a risk on his "leader's views". This is the major implication of the Abrahamic story, that the "Leader" is to be trusted. The leader spiritually is Jesus, but in reality, the leader is whoever is in power in the real world.

I would much rather do my business with people who are rational and reasonable, that do not ask for blind allegiance because, then you can understand and converse over the rationale of their propositions. People who do business based on "leaps of faith" have no rationale, as it is pure speculation and risk. And the Christian risk-taker calls it "God's will", even though there is no speicific plan. I think this is downright prsumptuous. Of course, this is my personal conviction....

"Killing the American Public"

Honor is a term that is useful for maintaining one's position or place of favor. It is dishonorable to do certain things according to certain traditions, which justify "killing" the guilty. Some traditions "tone down" the actual physical killing by shunning, which is social "killing". But, with the news tonight, it is obvious that not only does tradition "kill", but corporations.

Tonight's news featured AIG. I'm sure the average "joe" is tired of hearing about the overly lavish lifestyle that these executives have, not because of envy so much as resentment about "bailing" these people out of the financial mess they are responsible for. The "middle class" has lived frugally, or at least learned to save, and to make choices about what to do without, while these are living lifestyles that are beyond imagination for most. It is not wrong, necessarily to have or do nice things, but it is really wrong for those who have taken risks with their money or with corporate "investments", to not hold that risk. Why is it the American taxpayer that is to foot the bill? If we don't help then we will suffer the costs. We will suffer whether we bail them out or possibly, if we don't. So, we continue to trust our leaders and those who benefit from those who pay them off and we are oblivious.

This situation is similar to the "bail out" of the woman who chose to have in vitro fertilization and ended up with 14 children. Is it really the American people's responsibility to help when this person acted irresponsibly? But, some would ask, what about the children?

When one talks of helping those who have had limited means and have suffered from bad environments, then that is a different matter, but when there is overt disregard for responsible behavior and then a further disregarding of taking repsonsibility, then there is something definately wrong. Are we condoning the adolescent behavior of our leaders, while the average American is supposed to be a responsible citizen?

The demand that we pay for these irresponsibilities reminds me of "theology". Jesus death was to save a nation and others from their "sins". I find ethical problems with this theology, as it leads to irresponsibility. The American people are being asked to lay down their life for unjust causes, but are being told that it will save the nation in the long run. What ever happened to mature and responsible behavior as it concerns one's finances?

I am not at all suggesting that everyone should live the same standard of life, but I am suggesting that people understand that what they choose to do, is not to be dismissed from accountability with the American people. Americans have become tired of politicians acting as if we don't have a brain and dismissing our hearts. We all want what is best for our children, but some of us don't have the choices that others do. The American people cannot be asked to be more mature and responsible than their leaders. We need leaders that are respectable and respected. Then, maybe there would be more citizens wanting to be involved in politics and informing themselves about what is happening in Washington, rather than turning the channel when a politician comes on TV. And then maybe, honor will have the right meaning and take its rightful place in the public square.

Honor Killing

I just heard on NPR that a man was being prosecuted for killing his wife. The Inman , who was being questioned about this "duty", basically said that when a Christian or Jew beats their wife, there are no reprecussions, whereas, if a Muslim beats his, he is persecuted.

I find that any justification of beating anyone, is unbelievable. How can anyone justify that? I guess honor and shame are really an important attribute of religious social control!

The Consent of the Governed and Religious Freedom

Politics is the domain where we work, play, worship, and live our lives. The political realm is the network of our communities, colleagues, and other social connections. What our political policy and understanding of government that runs the policy is an important one, as it affects all of life.

We are no longer ruled by "the divine right of kings". This is the prinicple of our revolution of England's king to reign over us. Taxation without representation was an important "pivot point" because those who led the revolution felt that all people were created equal under law. That we were not to be a colony, but an independent government. This had/has major implications in understanding faith.

Many fled to America for religious freedom, but finding a place to worship as one saw fit, did not alleviate the need to form a "government'. Church government became a point of contention and led to many dissentions and splits. Some sects thought that the "heretical" should suffer persecution, or worse, death. Those who held such views had not given up on the "divine right of God" and how they understood man's duty toward the "transcendental realm". These believed in a personal God. Believers were not the only ones that made American history, but it was a value that is upheld in our Constitution and the separation of Church and State.

Everyone has an understanding or an "ideal" of what government should "look like" and this is the realm of political discourse. It is the realm of what "should be" and "how it should be accomplished". For the most part, Republicans and Democrats have a different view about what that should look like. Although the political parties have political platforms that formally describe their positions, these positions differ in particular individuals within these parties. Some have even attempted to form a Third Party, but not with much sucess.

Republicans believe in "free market economics" and family values, limited government, etc., while the Democrats believe in social concern in government programs, enlarging government and limiting the free market.

I find that our freedoms politically are the most important value to uphold, as without freedom there is little room for development of individual values, commitments, beliefs, lifestyle, etc. Political freedom is valued by all humans.

The consent of the governed is based on social contract, ethics, human rights, and political freedom. We cannot have morality, or ethical choice apart from political freedom. This very freedom was what some came to our shores to find. Today, Americans have liberty because of the commitment of men and women who were willing to lay their lives down for it. We should do no less!