The American Founders did not establish just any
"Republic,"
rather they consciously designed a system of government
in the
context of a defined Christian
worldview--a Christian Republic.
However, this fact has little relevance today, other than
for purposes of historical accuracy, since America has drifted so far from
its roots and a return to this form of government is highly impossible or
highly improbable. For a better understanding, read The Nature of
the American System, Rushdoony. Recommendation of this book does
not imply agreement with the author's theonomic theology.
Communism is a violent, revolutionary form of
socialism.
Communists encompass a diverse group of ideologues.
However, they all share a common philosophic/atheistic foundation -- the
erroneous, pseudo-economic theories of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, and
Nikolai Lenin --see
Marx's Manifesto: 150 Years of Evil. Phillip E.
Johnson remarks, "What is common to all varieties of Marxist thought is
the proposition that the fundamental moral fact about the human
condition is that a class of victims is dominated by a class of
oppressors. It follows that the cure for oppression is liberation,
whether through violent revolution [communism] or by cultural
transformation [socialism]. In classical Marxism the oppressor
class was the bourgeoisie or capitalists, while the revolutionary
class was the proletariat or industrial wage-laborers. The
specific cure was for the workers to seize control of the factories and
establish a dictatorship of the proletariat, to be followed by the
utopia of communism."
Socialism is the non-violent version of Marxist
thought. Although there are several varieties, the original vision
of socialism is of a "world society under the democratic control of
those who produce the world's wealth and services." Socialism is a
utopian political dream that promises a "new society of equality,
justice, freedom and prosperity." It is fully messianic, with Man
playing the role of God. It promises "the emancipation of labour,
a society founded on workers' control in which work would be transformed
from drudgery done in the pursuit of profit to collective activity done
in the service of human needs." As an extension of the dream,
socialism upholds "the banner of world peace and internationalism, of an
end to military conflict between the world's peoples," and "overcoming
alienation and exploitation, inhumanity and misery, violence and war."
(1)
Socialists are typically divided into those who seek to impose their
ideology "from above," and those who promote "from below."
Liberal democrats are typically socialists.
Government is the answer to everything. The role of government is
to ensure the well-being of the citizenry from "cradle to grave."
Liberal democrats represent America's bastion of
modernism and
naturalism.
Like their more liberal associates,
moderate Democrats sincerely believe that government should be at work
solving most all of society's problems. However, they often are not
happy about onerous taxation. The answer? Make sure you
extract more dollars from Federal programs than you pay in taxes!
Moderate democrats are simply liberal democrats with an occasional attack of
conscience.
This is the majority's political
philosophy on America's political spectrum. It includes nearly
all voters and elected representatives from the Democratic and
independent camps, as well as a large percentage of Republicans.
These people complain loudly about politicians "all sounding the same"
but fail to understand the recent shifts in America's cultural
and philosophic views. Berkeley law professor Phillip E. Johnson
poignantly explains what he calls "libertarian socialism".
Everyone has a right
to live exactly as he or she pleases, but if something goes wrong,
some abstraction called "society" is to blame and must pay the bill
for damages. The savings and loan debacle of the 1980s was not
an isolated incident but a paradigmatic example of the delusionary
character of American thought near the end of the twentieth century.
The S&L [financial bankruptcy] debacle occurred because the
government freed financiers to make risky investments and at the
same time insured the depositors who put up the money from any loss.
The same generous public policy applies to individual behavior.
Everyone must be free to make risky choices, and everyone must be
protected from unpleasant consequences by social insurance that is
ultimately provided by government, which is to say by nobody.
REASON IN THE BALANCE, The Case Against NATURALISM in Science, Law &
Education. Read this book!
Like moderate Republicans below, many
libertarian welfarists are pseudo-religious in that they give lip
service to Jewish and Christian traditions, but have long since
abandoned Theism.
This
general political philosophy should not be confused with the political
fringe anarchist groups associated with the
Libertarian/Socialistand Socialist/Libertarian movements.
However, they might herald things to come.
The label "fiscal conservative, social liberal"
probably best describes these folks. Most
moderate republicans are pragmatists first and conservatives second.
This group, representing a substantial percentage of the Republican
party, are sympathetic to the rich cultural values that have flowed from
the Judeo-Christian tradition. However, similar to some urbanites
who purchase white liquid in cartons but have no idea milk comes from
cows, these citizens truly don't understand the connection between
cultural values and religious foundations. They have been rapidly
embracinga more libertarian position. The presidential candidate
John McCain is a prime example of this position. Like their
moderate Democratic counterpart, personal peace and ever-increasing
affluence are their primary values. Similar to the liberal
left, a large percentage of this group hold to the
Modernist
worldview.
Limited Government based on individual
self-government. Because of America's moral deficit, this group
has been a dying breed. Conservative Republicans most represent
the thinking of the Nation's original Founders. Man is NOT
basically good; checks-and-balances are necessary to prevent
concentration of power and tyranny. This group contains the
highest percentage of those who hold a genuine
theistic worldview. Consequently, the definition and role for
government is anchored in the Judeo-Christian tradition (Romans 13).
This allows government to provide for national defense, social
well-being within limits, and punishment of criminals. Creativity
and work are virtues; idleness and laziness are vice. These
Republicans support the American tradition of a constitutional,
democratic, and representative form of government. A good example
of this position is the
Free Congress Foundation.
The most notable examples of this
position are Supreme Court Justice
Clarence Thomas, 1996 Republican Presidential candidate Dr. Alan
Keyes, as well as Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity of the Fox News
Channel. All are heirs of the Catholic 'natural law' tradition
established by medieval Catholic theologian, Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274).
This variety of natural law theory holds that moral values are fixed
features of the universe which all humanity can discover through reason.
All truth is self-evident; but we have to regularly blow the dust off.
Consequently, their primary appeal is to Logic rather than to
revelation--the Bible. When faced with today's postmodern flight
from reason, Alan Keyes logically snaps in frustration, "That's absurd."
"That's nonsense." "That's absurd nonsense!" This position
has no connection with the "Natural Law Party" which is the political
policy arm of the pantheistic/techno
cult, Transcendental Mediation, and the Maharishi
Yogi.
"Christian libertarianism is the
view that mature individuals (professing Christians in the church, and
all externally obedient men in the state) are permitted maximum freedom
under God's law.
"The name libertarian is
ordinarily identified as an economic and political philosophy stressing
human freedom and minimum (almost non-existent) state interference in
individual lives and activities. Its proponents, despite wide
differences among themselves, include Ludwig von Mises (economics),
Murray Rothbard (social theory), and Ayn Rand (philosophy). Their thesis
usually operates on a strictly Enlightenment pre-commitment to the
centrality of human freedom and man's rational choices as the most desirable
feature of human existence. It thereby repeats the Original Sin of lust
for human autonomy (Gen. 3:5).
"Nevertheless, libertarianism
manifests certain distinct features of biblical-Reformed religion, and,
when anchored to biblical Faith and shorn of its sinfully autonomous
impulses, points toward a fully legitimate orientation to life: maximum
freedom under God's law. Indeed, one may argue that libertarianism is a
secularized version of certain critical aspects of the Christian
conception of freedom, which sees human authority strictly limited by
divine authority as expressed in Holy Scripture." Andrew Sandlin.
See
The Christian Libertarian Idea.
Minimal-to-No Government.
Libertarians are humanist utopians who believe that mankind is
basically good, individual freedom is the highest virtue, and thus
everyone should be free to do as they choose, so long as they don't
infringe upon the freedoms of others. As Sandlin states above, the
libertarian "repeats the Original Sin of lust for human autonomy."
Nearly all human interaction should be voluntary, not coerced. No
individual or group of individuals shall initiate force against the
person or property of any other individual. Governments should not
interfere with the interactions and exchanges of peaceful people.
Libertarians claim to be a diverse group of people with many
philosophical starting points; however, they all share one fundamental
tenet. Libertarians reject the
theistic worldview, which posits
the Creator's claim over the creature, and government's claim over the
citizen. Most consistent libertarians are atheist.
Several of America's libertarians are of the socialistic type mentioned
above.
No Government.
Anarchists
embrace the theory or doctrine that all forms of government are
unnecessary, oppressive, and undesirable and should be abolished, with
violence if necessary.
Also see
Prominent Anarchists...
You have now arrived at the political
worm-hole
which will transport you to the other end of this political spectrum.
Why? Because the positions of No Government and Total
Government have a symbiotic relationship--each the antithesis of the
other.
NO GOVERNMENT CONTROL / Individualism
1)
Phillip E. Johnson continues to say, "Contemporary versions of this exciting
drama flourish in universities, with a new cast of characters. Now the
oppressor is the heterosexual white male; the new proletariat consists of racial
minorities, women, gays and lesbians; and the struggle is for control of the
terms of discourse. Great victories are won, as when newspaper
editorialists and judges accepted the term "homophobia" as a fair descriptive
term for the state of mind that leads people to oppose gay-rights ordinances.
Institutions once thought to be obviously healthy, such as motherhood and the
family, become reinterpreted as means of oppression--just as the original
Marxists reinterpreted employment as 'wage slavery.'"
REASON IN THE BALANCE, The Case Against NATURALISM in Science, Law &
Education.
David Feddes, that excellent speaker of the "Back to God Hour" of the
Christian Reformed Church, has said, "Any nation or society in which voluntary
virtue is shrinking has either so much law and order that it verges on tyranny,
so much individual freedom that it verges on anarchy, or else it ends up with
some crazy combination of tyranny and anarchy." This way of looking at
things can help us see that some of the problems and increasingly bizarre
situations in our public life rise out of the fact that voluntary virtue is
becoming rare. But even if we see that very basic problem, the fact
remains that the government itself can’t do much about it. Government can
make laws or declare rights and liberties, but it can’t do much to increase the
voluntary virtue that makes a society livable.
The answer lies in expanding the area where the gospel of Jesus Christ
reigns. The gospel has far more power than the government. We are
not talking merely about preaching at a gospel service for an hour on a Sunday.
The good news of Jesus Christ is believed and lived out in the lives of all who
are in his kingdom. There are gospel individuals who are ready to explain
their faith and they are salt in office, factory, school and neighborhood.
There are gospel families whose homes are centers for light and hope throughout
the nation. There are gospel churches where congregations of those who
believe the gospel gather and strengthen one another. What power such a
gospel has. It doesn’t offer a little legislation in some areas, plus a
little license to do as we please in other areas, plus a third realm in which,
it is hoped, we’ll occasionally do the right thing on our own. The gospel
takes sinners right out of the mind set of legalism and amoral license and
plants them for ever in the realm of grace.
As David Feddes says, "In that realm we don’t ask, ‘What do I have to do?’ as
we do in the realm of legalism. Nor do we ask, ‘How far can I go and what
can I get away with?’ as we would in the realm of license. Instead we ask,
‘How can I please the God who purchased me with the blood of his Son and adopted
me into his family? What sort of person is God helping me to become?
How can I flourish in love from him and in love for other people?’
This life of gratitude and love, this life grounded in grace and lived in the
power of God’s Holy Spirit is the only real world where we can flourish.
Incidentally, it is the only hope for a nation which could in the coming century
disintegrate into either government tyranny or moral anarchy.
Mail this page to a friend
