“In any successful attack on freedom the state can only be an accomplice. The chief culprit is the citizen who forgets his duty, wastes away his strength in the sleep of sin and sensual pleasure, and so loses the power of his own initiative.”
–Abraham Kuyper
via Karl Marx – Enlightenment Sermon 8 « Omnibus – Things worth thinking about…usually.
Machen writing about a book promoting imperialism:
It is a glorification of imperialism….A very immoral purpose indeed!…Imperialism, to my mind, is satanic, whether it is German or English… I am opposed to all imperial ambitions, wherever they may be cherished and with whatever veneer of benevolent assimilation they may be disguised… The author glorifies war and ridicules efforts at the production of mutual respect and confidence among equal nations….[The book] makes me feel anew the need for Christianity,…what a need for the gospel!
Writing in 1915 about the Allies:
The alliance of Great Britain with Russia and Japan seems to me still an unholy thing – an unscrupulous effort to crush the life out of a progressive commercial rival. Gradually a coalition had to be gotten together against Germany, and the purpose of it was only too plain. An alleged war in the interest of democracy the chief result of which will be to place a splendid people at the mercy of Russia does not appeal to me.
This talk about British democracy arouses my ire as much as anything. Great Britain seems to me the least democratic of all the civilized nations of the world – with a land-system that makes great masses of the people practically serfs, and a miserable social system that is more tyrannical in the really important, emotional side of life than all the political oppression that ever was practiced. And then if there is such a thing as British democracy it has no place for any rival on the face of the earth. The British attitude towards Germany’s just effort at a place in ocean trade seems to me one of the great underlying causes of the war.
Machen on the draft:
Even temporary conscription goes against the grain with me, unless it is resorted to to repel actual invasion, but my fundamental objection is directed against compulsory service in time of peace.
The country seems to be rushing into two things to which I am more strongly opposed than anything else in the world – a permanent alliance with Great Britain, which will inevitably mean a continuance of the present vassalage, and a permanent policy of compulsory military service with all the brutal interference of the state in individual and family life which that entails, and which has caused the misery of Germany and France.
From a letter to his congressman:
Even temporary conscription goes against the grain with me, unless it is resorted to to repel actual invasion, but my fundamental objection is directed against compulsory service in time of peace.
The country seems to be rushing into two things to which I am more strongly opposed than anything else in the world – a permanent alliance with Great Britain, which will inevitably mean a continuance of the present vassalage, and a permanent policy of compulsory military service with all the brutal interference of the state in individual and family life which that entails, and which has caused the misery of Germany and France.
Hating school spirit:
Princeton is a hot-bed of patriotic enthusiasm and military ardor, which makes me feel like a man without a country.
Machen, was totally in favor of fighting to defend freedom when that was actually the case, rather than the Tisroc’s slave wars. For example:
The real indictment against the modern world is that by the modern world human liberty is being destroyed. At that point I know many modern men could only with difficulty repress a smile. The word liberty has today a very archaic sound; it suggests G.A. Henty, flag waving, the boys of ’76, and the like. Twentieth-century intellectuals, it is thought, have long ago outgrown all such childishness as that. So the modern historians are spelling “liberty,” when they are obliged to use the ridiculous word, in quotation marks: no principle, they are telling us, was involved, for example, in the American Revolution; economic causes alone produced that struggle; and Patrick Henry was engaging in cheap melodrama when he said, “Give me liberty or give me death.”
J. Gresham Machen was a conservative Presbyterian who wanted to preserve liberty against the Leviathan State who uses war in order to bring the native populace into further servitude while extending rule in foreign soil. It is a legacy worth remembering, especially for American Christians on this day.
No, I don’t think Paul would disagree with Hayek’s economic theory, or even very much with his social theorizing on the rule of law…
But by some weird providence, as soon as I got done listening to The Road to Serfdom I put my recording of the Romans back in the cd player and realized I was hearing about the same issues at their point of origin.
Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations… In Christ Jesus, then, I have reason to be proud of my work for God. For I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me to bring the Gentiles to obedience—by word and deed, by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God—so that from Jerusalem and all the way around to Illyricum I have fulfilled the ministry of the gospel of Christ; and thus I make it my ambition to preach the gospel, not where Christ has already been named… Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith— to the only wise God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ!
When you read Hayek it becomes clear that he is lamenting how history has changed directions. What should have been the flowering of Christian civilization has been traded for a bowl of red stuff.
And because he himself, despite acknowledging that Christian culture happened to be involved, is not a disciple of Jesus, Hayek can’t really call anyone back to what they had. He weeps over a cut flower and pleads with it to bloom again.
Hayek analyzed some elements of it and defended them, as much as a Darwinist could–but it was the Apostle Paul who gave us the international social order of peace, freedom, and prosperity. If you read The Road to Serfdom and then read Paul’s letter to the Romans, this basic truth will become forcefully apparent.
And just in case anyone doesn’t know what I mean by the “hip hop” reference:
YouTube – “Fear the Boom and Bust” a Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem.
United States Government officials should not secretly reinterpret public laws and statutes in a manner that is inconsistent with the public’s understanding of these laws, and should not describe the execution of these laws in a way that misinforms or misleads the public.
via Wyden and Udall Want Obama to Admit to Secret Collection Program | Emptywheel.
This sounds like it should be part of a riddle: “When is the rule of law not the rule of law?”
Sen. Rand Paul has single-handedly stopped the extension of three key provisions of the Patriot Act until after they expire at midnight Thursday. Unless he folds.
via Sen. Rand Paul Delays Renewal of Patriot Act Provisions – Washington Wire – WSJ.
Looks like the Southern bubba is going to do it while the cool and sophisticated Harvard-educated community organizer just amasses power.
“He’s fighting for an amendment to protect the right – not of average citizens, but of terrorists – to cover up their gun. It he thinks that it’s going to be a badge of courage on his side to have held this up for a few hours, he’s made a mistake.”
— Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on the Senate floor denouncing Sen. Rand Paul’s efforts to amend the PATRIOT Act.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Wednesday went beyond questioning Sen. Rand Paul’s patriotism, accusing the Kentucky freshman of trying to aid terrorists.
via Obama Dems Don’t Listen to Clinton on Debt – FoxNews.com.
I’m really curious if any blue-staters are allowing themselves to contemplate the present turn of events… and whether or not they might have been completely predictable.
So long as great Government departments (over which, be it observed, from the very exigencies of administration, the mass of the people can never have any real control) supply our wants, so long shall we remain in our present condition, the difficulties of life unconquered, and ourselves unfitted to conquer them.
No amount of State education will make a really intelligent nation; no amount of poor-laws will place a nation above want; no amount of Factory Acts will make us better parents. These great wants which we are now vainly trying to deal with by Acts of Parliament, by prohibitions and penalties, are in truth the great occasions of progress, if only we surmount them by developing in ourselves more active desires, by putting forth greater efforts, by calling new moral forces into existence, and by perfecting our natural ability for acting together in voluntary associations.
To have our wants supplied from without by a huge State machinery, to be regulated and inspected by great armies of officials, who are themselves slaves of the system which they administer, will in the long run teach us nothing, will profit us nothing.
–Auberon Herbert
It is a mistake to suppose that government effort and individual effort can live side by side. The habits of mind which belong to each are so different that one must destroy the other… The history of our race shows us that men will not do things for themselves or for others if they once believe that such things can come without exertion on their own part. There is not sufficient motive. As long as the hope endures that the shoulders of some second person are available, who will offer his own shoulders for the burden? It must also be remembered that unless men are left to their own resources they do not know what is or what is not possible for them. If government half a century ago had provided us all with dinners and breakfasts, it would be the practice of our orators today to assume the impossibility of our providing for ourselves.
–Auberon Herbert
While in pagan mythologies Wisdom and Love are two very different and often-conflicting goddesses, in the Bible, Sophia is both. The evidence is not only in Canticles but in Proverbs. Proverbs is the love book.
Let your fountain be blessed,
and rejoice in the wife of your youth,
a lovely deer, a graceful doe.
Let her breasts fill you at all times with delight;
be intoxicated always in her love.Hatred stirs up strife,
but love covers all offenses.[“Above all, keep loving one another earnestly, since love covers a multitude of sins.” — 1 Peter 4.8]
Better is a dinner of herbs where love is
than a fattened ox and hatred with it.Whoever covers an offense seeks love,
but he who repeats a matter separates close friends.[“…does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. — 1 Corinthians 13.6]
A friend loves at all times,
and a brother is born for adversity.[Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. — 1 Corinthians 13.7]
As a book about love, Proverbs stresses peace with and help to others.
Hatred stirs up strife,
but love covers all offenses. [again]Whoever belittles his neighbor lacks sense,
but a man of understanding remains silent.
Whoever goes about slandering reveals secrets,
but he who is trustworthy in spirit keeps a thing covered.The beginning of strife is like letting out water,
so quit before the quarrel breaks out.It is an honor for a man to keep aloof from strife,
but every fool will be quarreling.
And more conventional “charity” is also covered. Helping the poor is an important concern in Proverbs:
Whoever despises his neighbor is a sinner,
but blessed is he who is generous to the poor.Whoever oppresses a poor man insults his Maker,
but he who is generous to the needy honors him.Whoever mocks the poor insults his Maker;
he who is glad at calamity will not go unpunished.Whoever is generous to the poor lends to the LORD,
and he will repay him for his deed.Whoever closes his ear to the cry of the poor
will himself call out and not be answered.Whoever has a bountiful eye will be blessed,
for he shares his bread with the poor.
And yet along with all these imperatives to love and share and promote peace, we find the basics of the market ethics laid out. In fact, in the second section of Proverbs, it is laid out right at the beginning. Proverbs 10.1-5:
The proverbs of Solomon.
A wise son makes a glad father,
but a foolish son is a sorrow to his mother.
Treasures gained by wickedness do not profit,
but righteousness delivers from death.
The Lord does not let the righteous go hungry,
but he thwarts the craving of the wicked.
A slack hand causes poverty,
but the hand of the diligent makes rich.
He who gathers in summer is a prudent son,
but he who sleeps in harvest is a son who brings shame.
Notice the argument of these first five verses that set up everything that follows:
In the second of the awesome Keynes v. Hayek rap-videos, “Hayek” pleads:
We need stable rules and real market prices
So prosperity emerges and cuts short the crisis
Give us a chance so we can discover
The most valuable ways serve one another
I know that Hayek’s claim that the market is a means of serving others will meet with mockery and derision by some. But “Hayek” is obviously right and wise. Solomon would agree. Right along with loving your wife and refusing the ways of violence and theft and deceit (“force and fraud” as the Libertarians would put it) is the command to work hard, to save money, and to try with all diligence to become rich if possible.
A slack hand causes poverty,
but the hand of the diligent makes rich.One gives freely, yet grows all the richer;
another withholds what he should give, and only suffers want.Whoever loves pleasure will be a poor man;
he who loves wine and oil will not be rich.The reward for humility and fear of the LORD
is riches and honor and life.Love not sleep, lest you come to poverty;
open your eyes, and you will have plenty of bread.
What shows that we live in a foolish age is that we don’t see how all these imperatives to love entail and demand imperatives to work hard and save in order to build wealth. But it is the most obvious thing in the world:
How do you love your neighbor?
You help them out in their time of need.
How else?
Many ways.
And what don‘t you do?
You don’t rob or kill them.
Duh.
But a major point of Proverbs is that decisions to do right and refrain from wrong demand other decisions so that you can become a person who can do right. In this case, if you don’t want to take from others, you need to endeavor to provide for yourself. If it is more blessed to give than receive then it is more blessed to produce than to consume. And if you can’t support yourself, how can you ever help others? You will be too busy begging them to help you, and resisting the urge to steal from them. As the Apostle Paul summarized: “Let the thief no longer steal, but rather let him labor, doing honest work with his own hands, so that he may have something to share with anyone in need” (Ephesians 4.28).
Supporting oneself is fundamentally an act of loving one’s neighbor. Not everyone is able to do it, but everyone should want to do so. Because everyone is supposed to love.
In other words, if “capitalism” means a free market (rather than a crony kleptocracy), then to oppose capitalism is to oppose love and promote hatred.
Capitalism is the Marxist term for Christian society.
Related:
…So in this state, Mises comes to the United States, he’s penniless, he’s about 60 years old or so. He starts writing in a new language, and he can’t get an academic post. This is the eternal blot on academia. This is a situation where every Marxist and semi-Marxist and three-quarter Marxist was getting cushy top chairs at Harvard and Princeton and whatever, and Mises couldn’t find an academic post, and he finally got one at NYU as a visiting professor with a salary paid for by outside businessmen and foundations. Same thing happened to Hayek. Hayek’s salary at the University of Chicago was never paid for by Chicago; it was paid for by outside business groups.
As a result, Mises was scorned, the dean was against him, the dean advised people not to take his courses and things like that. He was in a fantastically miserable situation, and yet–and here’s where I come into the picture; I get to know him at this point–when he started a seminar at NYU.
…How did he act? It was magnificent, I couldn’t believe it. He was cheerful, was never bitter, never said an unkind word about anything, any person, and very sweet, and it was just a magnificent experience…