WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO CHALLENGE THE ESTABLISHMENT — PART 3

Here is the third and last part of a 3-parts series on The Establishment.

In this post we will look at what will we be required of us to reform The Establishment.

Reforming the Establishment

Why The Delay

I suppose some of my more devoted readers (the few such that there are) will note that gap in time between this post, part 3, and part 2, is almost two months. I must admit I have been distracted by the election. Fortunately, I got a trackback from a visitor, . He linked to Why Romney Can’t Beat Obama from this post, A mandate is a mandate. When I visited  A mandate is a mandate, an interesting discussion ensued, one that reminded me of this series.

Sharing The Wealth

Even though we all do it, we do not give it as much thought as we ought. What we do instead is carry out traditions handed to us by our parents.  That begins with one of the first words a child learns, “mine”. To overcome a child’s natural selfishness, parents must teach their children to share. That is, parents must teach their children how to love their family, friends and neighbors, and parents begin by teaching their children to share.

What does it mean to to share? Here are the definitions that apply to this discussion.

sharing
adj 1: sharing equally with another or others
2: unselfishly willing to share with others; “a warm and
sharing friend”
n 1: having in common; “the sharing of electrons creates
molecules”
2: using or enjoying something jointly with others

What parents do is teach their children the mechanics of sharing, when it is appropriate to share and how to share. And what is the logic most parents use? If we refuse to share, we are being selfish.

Unfortunately, there can a problem with the way we teach children to share.  As children we can become accustomed to having those in authority force us to share. In fact, many now accept that it is appropriate for government officials to punish those adults who refuse to “share”, that is, participate in redistributing the wealth. We may even believe it is appropriate for government officials to punish those adults for being “selfish”.

A Misplaced Priority

Our government does not exist to parent us. Our government exists to serve us by protecting our Rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Except for contributing what is required to protect our Rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, our government does not have any business forcing us to “share”.

Why do parents have the right to force their children to share? Almost everything a child has, that child’s parents provide. That is particularly true when a child is young, when they are being taught to share.

On the other hand, an adult has a right to wealth he has earned, and government, not even a tyrannical majority, has no right to take what one person has earned and give it to someone else. When they are so liable to abuse the power to redistribute the wealth, it is actually foolish to give public officials such power.

When we give public officials the power to redistribute the wealth, we fail to recognize the full value of voluntary charity. When we are forced to share, that sharing is not done out of  love. True sharing exists only when it is done in love. Therefore, when parents seek to teach their children to share, they succeed when they also teach their children how to love. And isn’t how they should love another human being what parents want their children to learn? But such instruction is far beyond the capacity of what we should rightly expect of public officials.

How We Reform The Establishment

To reform The Establishment, we must reform our attitudes towards sharing. We must return to our Christian roots. Consider what Jesus said about love.

John 15:12-17 Amplified Bible (AMP)

12 This is My commandment: that you love one another [just] as I have loved you.

13 No one has greater love [no one has shown stronger affection] than to lay down (give up) his own life for his friends.

14 You are My friends if you keep on doing the things which I command you to do.

15 I do not call you servants (slaves) any longer, for the servant does not know what his master is doing (working out). But I have called you My friends, because I have made known to you everything that I have heard from My Father. [I have revealed to you everything that I have learned from Him.]

16 You have not chosen Me, but I have chosen you and I have appointed you [I have planted you], that you might go and bear fruit and keep on bearing, and that your fruit may be lasting [that it may remain, abide], so that whatever you ask the Father in My Name [as presenting all that I AM], He may give it to you.

17 This is what I command you: that you love one another.

What Jesus taught and commanded Christians to do is love one another. That included sharing. For our sake, Jesus voluntarily shared even His own life. With His example, Jesus showed us that we are only the stewards of what God, our Father, has given us. With parables, Jesus illustrated how God expects us to share with those in need.

When we as a society force an adult to “share” his property, we do not perform an act of love. Instead, we participate in a theft. We demonstrate charity and love towards another only when we voluntarily share what is our own.

If we are to behave as Christians, then we must put the priority on helping each other to achieve salvation. With prayer and the power of example, each of us must show the other how to love ones neighbor. Such love does not permit government the coercive power required to redistribute the wealth.

The 2012 Election

When government redistributes the wealth, the electorate does not behave unselfishly. What happens is that people vote for the politicians who offer them the most of “other people’s money”.  Hence, we find in our elections a strange irony. The elected representatives of selfish voters call resentful taxpayers “selfish”.

If we are willing to see past our greed — to view what is right before our eyes — we will find an obvious solution. When we vote, we must vote out of concern for the welfare of our neighbors, not out of a concern for our personal pocketbooks. Even if we have a hard time loving our neighbors, we can act out of concern for our family and friends. Ultimately, the rascals who lead us will rob everyone of their freedom, each and every one of us, even each other.

About these ads

About Citizen Tom

I am just an average citizen interested in promoting informed participation in the political process.
This entry was posted in 2012 Election, Culture War, Information Warfare, unraveling. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO CHALLENGE THE ESTABLISHMENT — PART 3

  1. walthe310 says:

    Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself is an axiom that I use to measure the civility of our society. I will accept no conditions for my neighbor that I will not accept for myself or my family. I will not accept that my family or I are ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, ill-educated or ill, and all the people on earth are my neighbors.

    Some of the elderly and the poor are so hard pressed by their economic situation that they must sustain themselves with pet food. We have two cats, Gary and Foo, strays that we have adopted. We sometimes feed them wet food and sometimes dry. I have tried the dry food and it is bitter. I have never tried the wet food because of its consistency and because of the odor that some of it has. I will never ask my family to subsist on pet food and I reject that necessity for some of my neighbors.

    In this land of opportunity, some are denied an equal chance because their early years are stunted by poverty and poor schools. I reject the fact that my neighbors, their children or grand-children cannot compete on an equal basis because I will not accept those handicaps for my family. I will love my neighbor as I love my family.

  2. Pingback: A Fork in the Road | One Lifetime

  3. Pingback: A Fork in the Road | Transient Reflections

Comments are closed.