Liberalism Masquerading as American Judeo-Christian Values
Many argue that America is marching toward socialism. This march started during the Progressive Era of the early 1900s as a softer, incremental, and stealthier ideology than the European Marxism that culminated in revolution and the establishment of the Soviet Union in 1917. This communist ideology spread to Asia, Africa, and South America. It threatened us during the 1940s-1950s (during the McCarthy era), but never gained a strong following in this country. In socialism, the means of production are owned or controlled by the state, while in capitalism individuals manage and own the economic resources (with corporatism blurring the lines, but ultimately in favor of the state as well.) One can view progressives, liberals, and socialists as different points on the continuum from capitalism to communism, rather than as distinct ideologies. Many liberals want to improve society, however many of their programs conflict with the political system established by our Founders. Can we better understand the movement and halt their dangerous plans?
With the pressure being applied by the White House upon the Democrats in the House of Representatives to approve the Senate health care reform bill, this danger becomes more evident. Many Americans oppose the secrecy and deal-making and worry about the details of the reform bills. These politicians grab power despite the limitations imposed by our Constitution, increasing control over our lives. Liberals claim to correct societies’ ills and this underlies their ability to minimize our liberties. They commonly justify their plans as a remedy for “injustice and unfairness.”
American philosophical ethos and religiosity is unique, often described as the Judeo-Christian ethic. Religion is a unified system of beliefs in order to explain the human purpose within the universe. The form depends upon the deity worshipped and the rituals followed. Our Founders were principally Protestant Christians steeped in Old Testament (Jewish) theology. American ethics (which is an expression of moral values) owes its origins to Greek philosophers such as Socrates and Aristotle as modified by Medieval, Renaissance, Reformation, and Enlightenment era philosophers, and recently influenced by Eastern philosophies with their more naturalistic spirituality. With the European Enlightenment, challenges to Western religion and socio-political order came from the questioning of theology initiated by Descartes, Voltaire, Kant, and Hegel, culminating in the atheism expressed by Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche. In Europe, this trend has spread more quickly and many are irreligious. The overwhelming majority of Americans acknowledge a deity, though this fervor has declined.
In America centralized power has arisen incrementally. The progressive uses evolutionary rather than revolutionary change, while the radical Marxist uses a more revolutionary approach. Accumulation of private wealth in the form of property, precious metals, money, and consumables predates recorded history. However, socialists strive to criminalize these efforts through this modern “Robin Hood” approach.
Yes, from out of the primordial soup random electrons came together and poof: Barack Obama: evolution! Or G-d created the world and in making us in G-ds image turned over the creating to us! We live in a finite world: what/where were we before birth and after death? Since you can not answer: there is a G-d that lives in an infinite word that we can not perceive…or random electrons and poof Obama!…
Listen up, Dr. Bones! Wombscholarship has just ascertained that
“American philosophical ethos and religiosity is unique, often described as the Judeo-Christian ethic.”
(( A little grammar-challenged, maybe, but what is language correctness among ideobuddies? ))
Alas, your Honour, and ’tis another sad case of _asinus ad lyram_ for poor Paddy and me! We predestinate _dhimmí_ jackasses cannot appreciate so lofty a strain of neo-auto-harpin’ as this. Old Nick. or somebody, keeps putting it into our minds that anything whatever can be ‘unique’ — provided you resolutely ignore everything else that resembles it the least bit. [*] [**]
Do you remember, Dr. Bones, St. Jack’s [***] little story about, or rather against, the so-called “stream of consciousness” in Eng. Lit.? A traffic cop stops all the traffic himself and then solemnly scribbles in his notebook, “The silence in this street is extremely suspicious.” (IQFM)
Like unto that is the dottiness of Neocomrade Dr. Dent. H. J. Warner.
And I remain, ever wishing your Honour, and all of the former Christojudaeandom.
Healthy days.
___
[*] To avoid possible confusion at Rio Limbaugh and Port Lucid, perhaps the dental neocomrade could be prevailed upon to change the name of his swell new product line to, say, ‘neouniqueness’?
[**] It does not appear whether Old Europe and the rest of the Eastern hemisphere are actually bein’ flushed down the George Orwell Memorial Memory Hole, or whether the decerebrate kiddie speaks figuratively, meanin’ only to excommunicate the bastards from Western Sieve(®) — after which setback, no doubt they might as well not be existential, though technically speaking they would remain so.
And Father Zeus knows best.
[***] Dear Rio Limbaugh, / “St. Jack” is Clive Staples Lewis, died Y. R. 1383/1962/5732. / As ever, JHM
Apparantly libs are aware that socialism historically only takes hold in countries that are economically depressed so they throw us into bankruptcy so we’ll have no choice but to depend on the goverment for everything and sadly churches are fooled into thinking that libs actually support christianity which they don’t. Christians doing good works by proxy, ie government entitlement programs, isn’t what God had in mind. One only has to read the story of the good Samaritan to know this.
Jesus said to be generous to the poor with what you have, he never told anyone to be generous to the poor with what your NEIGHBOR has…liberals support a system that does just that…
Liberalism and Christianity?
or is it Liberalism vs. Christianity?
I suggest that you read or listen to Christianity and Liberalism by J. Gresham Machen (1923) which is available in mp3′s.
- http://reformedaudio.org/machen.html (audio)
- http://www.reformed.org/books/chr_and_lib/ (text)
Where the author proves that modern Liberalism is a completely different religion seperate from Christianity. There is NO such thing as a “liberal Christian”.
In my opinion it goes back to the very 1st liberal (in Eden) who by the way is indentified by Saul Alinsky (Hussien Obama’s mentor) in the dedication to his book ‘Rules for Radicals’. The book was dedicated to Lucifer, the first radical.
also see Lucifer, The First Liberal
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/904024/posts
Secular politicians use our concern for less fortunate people to secure greater power, thus eroding our freedoms. And that is the disguise in this masquerade.
Absolutely. This is the dog that isn’t barking in all this mess.
The alleged concern is simply a vehicle, a charade, a prop, a front. Not to mention that the very judgment of “less fortunate” is implicitly condescending to its target groups.
(Personally, I can’t imagine anyone “less fortunate” than the devastatingly hypocritical Chuck Schumer, Barney Fwank, Nancy Pelosi, Obama…I’ll get typer’s cramp, the list of “unfortunates” is so long)
I would only change “secular politicians” to progressives, leaving out religious allusion in naming them. Many progressives at least pretend to religious belief, cf Teddy Kennedy as the poster child.
In America centralized power has arisen incrementally.
Video link: The agenda has been meticulously unfolded over a very long time
“Many progressives at least pretend to religious belief,”
Even worse, many of them infest our churches (and especially the umbrella outfits like the NCC), slapping a cross on good ol’ socialism and selling it as “Christian” under the rubric “social justice.” The more virulent form, seen mostly in Latin America and the black community, is full-on Marxism with a clerical collar: “liberation theology.”
“Many progressives at least pretend to religious belief,”
and some really are religious! It’s a fact. They are very very very religious. But thier religion is NOT a christian religion.
It might look like real Christianity on the surface but when
closely examined it is not Christian at all.
They have a completely different Jesus, a non-judgemental God (who doesn’t mind child sacrifice), and the Bible is just a bunch
of old disconnected stories. All you have to do to be saved is to
read John 3:16 once or twice in a lifetime and you are saved.
And people wonder WHY this nation is under Divine Judgement (aka Obama)
Revolutionary movements often misappropriate and redefine generally accepted religious and political concepts and buzzwords as a way to make their radical agendas seem mainstream. In the 60′s I wrote a short paper for humanities class exploring the use of religious imagery to serve Stalin’s personality cult.
One master of this form of deception is the Rev. Wright, our Maximum Leader’s spiritual mentor.
The most brutal murderers of our age have clothed themselves in venerable, cherished concepts—with a vicious twist.
See also The Pournelle Political Axes, noting that he reverses left and right from the conventional usage on his graph.
Seems to me that Nancy Pelosi is doing her best to become Prime Minister.
Thank you for making this article. Finally, someone distinguishes the two. JESUS WAS NOT A SOCIALIST.
To the apes, monkeys and baboons, as well as their cousins, one must offer peanuts, bananas and similar fruits and veggies. But just remember to save 3,000% of that stock for their future needs, because of AGW and food will become scarce. And spread all that around all 57 States, for better storage.
Warner: Socialism postulates a solution to questions of inequity through class struggle, favoring the disadvantaged over the wealthy. The Judeo-Christian ethic looks to the rejection of God’s word as the cause of failure.
This is the one part of the article I take issue with. It is entirely possible to not reject God’s word and still end up disadvantaged. C’est la vie. It would be closer to the truth to say the Judeo-Christian ethic acknowledges that there is no solution, not in this life anyway. Under this mindset, the response to social injustice in this life is to hope and pray for justice to come in the next one, and simply carry on as best you can in the meantime. Of course, one must believe in the Judeo-Christian concept of an afterlife in the first place for this approach to have any appeal at all.
#14 Joshua – No, one cannot have God in one’s life and end up being disadvantaged. When has God, one is happy, whatever one’s circumstances. God gives one the strength to endure and triumph, because it gives one, greater, even infinite, perspective.
I am poor and decrepit. I could despair and rage against my misfortune, but I do not. I used to before accepting Christ. Embracing God transforms you, leading always to a better life, because faith is followed by action. Such action, motivated by faith, results in good things always.
Re: Marc, #15: You and I seem to be using different definitions of the word “disadvantaged”. I am going by the purely economic one, in the spirit of Warner’s original article. The one you’re going by goes beyond economics and therefore, beyond the scope of the article and most of the preceding comments.
With that in mind, I stand by my original assertion: It is entirely possible to not reject God’s word and still end up economically disadvantaged. C’est la vie. At least you have obviously accepted that last part, which is more than can be said about progressives, and that goes a long way toward explaining why they stand for what they do.
The US is looking more and more like the movie Planet of the Apes.. Obama reminds me of the son in The Omen.. yep I love my movies but The Omen was too scarey for me.. but here we are living it.. God help us all..
Sell your possessions and give to charity; make yourselves purses which do not wear out, an unfailing treasure in heaven, where no thief comes near, nor moth destroys. [Luke 12:33]
And [John the Baptist] would answer and say to them, “Let the man with two tunics share with him who has none, and let him who has food do likewise. [Luke 3:11]
He who oppresses the poor reproaches his Maker, but he who is gracious to the needy honors Him [Proverbs 14:31]
Open your mouth for the dumb, for the rights of all the unfortunate. Open your mouth, judge righteously, and defend the rights of the afflicted and needy. [Proverbs 31:8]
Jesus taught sacrificial love. It doesn’t matter what the poor did to make themselves the way they are. The point is that you help them anyway. You should help the poor, sick, and hungry. To deny that is to deny Jesus’ words.
Adrian – those are commandments for CHRISTIANS in their personal lives. All of the Christians I know give money AND time generously to a large number of charitable organizations.
Our government was founded to let us get on with our lives, hopefully with a spiritual motivation.
I am accountable to God for my actions. I am not accountable for YOURS. I am asked to tell you the good news; I cannot make you accept it.
Government cannot change people’s hearts by throwing money at them. Government is there to PROTECT its citizens, not to control everything that they do.
The “communist ideology” was created by conservatives.