“Slaves never became an important ingredient of Egyptian civilization. The large subject population and enforceable corvée system - by which serfs had to work temporarily as slaves - made a permanent force of slaves unnecessary.” History of Slavery, Susan Everett
Corvée, or statute labour, is unpaid labour imposed by the state on certain classes of people for the performance of work on public projects. The obligation of corvée work by tenants or residents on private landed estates has been widespread throughout history. The corvée was the earliest and most extensive form of taxation, which can be traced back to the beginning of civilization.[1] The Israelite people were in a Corvee system used by Egyptians.
“Whatever day makes man a slave, takes half his worth away.” Homer - Odyssey. Bk.XVII. L.392. Pope’s trans.
But this would mean, “Whatever day takes half his worth away, makes a man a slave.”
In order to get people to sign up for a corvee system there usually needs to be the appearance of an advantage to the members.
Social insurance was not an American invention. For the most part, it was a Continental innovation, appearing first in Europe in the late 19th century. some 20 nations around the world already had such a program in place, and another 30 or more had introduced at least one other social insurance program. Contributory Social Insurance programs first began as early as 1900 in parts of Australia. thy were limited in scope until the late 1920s.
This new idea of a government run social security system began in Austria shortly after the 1938 Anschluss thanks to Hitler's progressive approach. In America a similar system was established by President Roosevelt on August 14, 1935. Thousands of years earlier the Pharaoh and Joseph set up a similar system in Egypt. That system allowed all the citizens of a country to literally be Employed by the State. In Egypt Joseph limited the share of labor that the state could take to only 1/5 of the annual labor of the people and it was called the bondage of Egypt. That amounted to 20% of an individuals labor was taken from the people to support the welfare system provided by the State.
Some times there is a famine and to get help a ruler will set up a system like that in Egypt set up by Joseph for the Pharaoh. He put a ceiling limit of 20%. Other systems are not limited as to the amount and some systems borrow what is needed and the people may become a surety for the debt.
No value
In Egypt gold was removed from the people and they used something as money that had no value except within their system. The Spartan also saw private wealth as the enemy of the state and only had lead money. The people needed to be in debt with no accumulation of real wealth or real money where they might be able to pay their debt and buy their freedom. They could have legal tender but not lawful money.
The move to a fiat monetary economy and modern federal employee identification number makes it possible to have a more diversified work force. Instead of moving people to a work camp of government workers all workers labor at their regular job under the authority of someone who as a Federal Employer Identification Number (EIN). That employer sends the funds that they could have been paid to the laborer to the Federal government. The value of his labor is diverted by federal employers so that if an individual works 10 hours, they will only be paid for some of those hours. Other term for this may include Social Security tax, income tax, ortribute.
In this way everyone works at their regular jobs without pay for a period of time each hour of each day and what would have gone into their pockets now is, in theory, sent to fund the government in the construction of infrastructure or for providing other government services. In this way the modern tax system more closely resembles the corvee systems of unpaid labor imposed by the state on classes within society.
In the modern times since almost all governments borrow their operating funds more often what is taken from its members is only used to pay the interest on the staggering and an ever increasing debt of the government.
So, because the government pays for services provided for with borrowed funds the worker is actually perpetually working merely to pay the interest on ever loans from "the bankers' banker", like the Federal Reserve.
[[
The individual registered workers are actually]] employed in the bondage of Egypt without the 20% ceiling imposed by Joseph.
Right to Labor
The people in Egypt no longer had an exclusive right to their labor for they have been employed by the State. In fact, as collateral for debt of the government, they were also surety for the debts of the government.
“The man who gives me employment, which I must have or suffer, that man is my master, let me call him what I will.” Henry George - Social Problems, Ch. V.
There are a variety of ways people are persuaded to sign away their right to their labor. A number of philosophies and ideologies have arisen under different names but all of them take society in the same direction.
Marxism is a political and economic way of organizing society, where the workers own the means of production. Socialism is a way of organizing a society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the proletariat. Marx proposed that this was the next necessary step in the progress of history.
To say Marxism "evolved" is like saying a cancer evolved.
Man is an individual product of creation, and a singular means of production of creation with a natural right to choose.
But as a human, and a member of mankind, he must care about his fellowman's rights as much as his own.
Marx summarized his philosophy in the simple phrase: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
The question remains who decides the “from” and who should decide the legitimacy of a “need”?
Since, “Freedom is the Right to Choose, the Right to create for oneself the alternatives of Choice. Without the possibility of Choice, and the exercise of Choice, a man is not a man but a member, an instrument, a thing”, then you cannot have Marxism unless you take choice from the individual, making the man less a person and more a thing.
Marxism by its nature is the end of the natural right to choose and freedom itself. In Marxism man becomes an instrument, a thing and little more than a means of production and a resource.
It is bad enough in the nature of Marxism a man looses his liberty but in his desire to benefit at his comrades expense he also forfeits his soul with the loss of his humanity.
Marxism, Communism, Socialism and other economic and political systems depend for their legitimacy on some of the same arguments of justification.
By their nature the must take some of the power of choice away from the individual as we can see in the summary of the Marxists ideology:
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
Man in his natural state may live by, “From each according to his ability and his free choice, to each according to his needs according to love and mercy of the individual.”
By contrast, socialism in theory is based on the idea that people will be compensated at some future date based on their level of individual contribution to the economy. I truth that is not the way the system are created.
Like the Pharaoh in an age gone by these systems inevitably require people to make bricks with little or no straw.[1]
"The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits." Plutarch The warnings of weakening the people and even destroying society with free bread provided by benefactors who exercise authority through the willfulness of the people have come down to us for centuries from historians like Polybius and satirist like Juvenal and politicians like Cicero, but also the prophets, John the Baptist, Jesus and the apostles. Phil Vischer's video, while polished and well done is not only misleading the people who watch it but is missing a basic understanding of the key factors in the individual and social development of communities and the cause for societal decay known for centuries. Many of the statistics in the video are not the effect of the programs and laws mentioned but the effect of the programs and practices he failed to mention and even appears to be encouraging. The reason he does not know the solution, which he admits, is because he has not identified the problem. He is right about people needing to care but if you want go fix society we need to care in away that "strengthens the poor"[2] and not in ways that degenerates their society, which again he appears to promote. The Way of Moses and Jesus forbid the legal charity of a social welfare state.
The Solution Seen
Patrick Henry argued against the Constitution of the United States because he saw that “When evil men take office, the whole gang will be in collusion! They will keep the people in utter ignorance and steal their liberty by ambuscade!”
The Constitution was flawed from a biblical point of view if we understood Deuteronomy 17.
Do we understand those flaws, and are we prepared to guard against them?
It was not the Constitution[3] that made this nation great, but the noble individuals who rose up every day, worked in the fields and factories, cared for their families, and provided for the honest needs of their community.
While America began as a republic the people moved into a Democracy under FDR and his New Deal. James Russell Lowell said, “Democracy gives every man the right to be his own oppressor” and he begins the process by oppressing his neighbor.[4]
From the beginning[5]Jefferson wanted to free slaves and worked to change the laws so that all men might be free saying, “Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God?"[6] That they are not to be violated but with His wrath?”[7]
We are no longer what we were. Forgetting the ways of righteousness the people have "degenerated" into "perfect savages finding once more a monarck and a king" as Polybius warned more than 2000 years ago.
“America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”[8]
What make a society great but the goodness of the individuals who populate it?
What binds a free society so that it may remain free?
Those who care about their neighbor's rights and freedom as much as they care about their own may remain free. But, those who have eyes for power over others or the things they produce or own by right[9] cannot see where they are going for they do not understand that "the love of power is the demon of men".[10]
Counting Crimes and Incarcerations
There are politicians, protesters and pundits who gather and share statistics correlating the numbers with the cause of what is conveniently identified as a problem in society.
But correlation alone is not proof of the cause. In statistics, the phrase "correlation does not imply causation" is a reference to the inability to legitimately deduce a cause-and-effect relationship between variables solely on the basis of an observable association or correlation between them. The idea that "correlation implies causation" is a questionable-cause logicalfallacy, in which two events occurring together are taken to have established a cause-and-effect relationship when in fact they have not.
Without understanding all of the factors effecting the processes of the individual events and their effects upon the crowd psychology of society as a group evidence of the actual causality may be illusive. Causality is influence by which one event, process or state contributes to the production of another event, process or state where the cause is partly responsible for the resulting effect, and the effect is partly dependent upon the cause. In general, a process may have many causes, which are also said to be causal factors.
Where is the real threat to communities and their members?
Is it the judicial and police policies or other factors driving statistics?
Can community or collective cultural practices cultivate the apathy, sloth, avarice, and greed of the people themselves?
What really is taking the liberty and the lives in society?
Is it even a significant factor in causing the difficulties and inequalities in society as some people suggest the statistics prove?
Why are people rioting? If they are wrong about their conclusions concerning the real meaning of statistics presented and repeated in the media, what is the truth?
What has caused liberty to diminish and society to decay in nation after nation from the dawn of man?
The Race in America, a Holy Post video by Phil Vischer correlates what appears to be an impressive list of statistics which he seems to claims prove the cause of the plight of American Black community is racism.
Are there statistical disparity in his statistical conclusions and is there a "lurking variable" he has not perceived?
Have communities been accepting ideas that have been creeping in to their thinking through schemes or practices that have been steadily altering the course and culture of society?
"I have begun everything with the idea that I could succeed, and I never had much patience with the multitudes of people who are always ready to explain why one cannot succeed. – Booker T Washington
While Phil's video is polished the facts can be misleading because it is missing a basic understanding of the key factors in the individual and social development of communities as the root causes of why they break down. His presentation is not alone in its misconception of the cause and effect for societal decay.
"A whining crying race may be pitied but seldom respected." – Booker T Washington
Many of the statistics presented by pundits who point to racism as the problem are used by their opponents to prove another cause for the effects we see.
There are those that like quoting that "In 2018, black people were three times more likely to be killed by police than were whites." That sounds terrible but is it because of racism?
What they fail to mention is that Blacks commit more than 5 times the crimes as Whites including almost 50 percent of the murders even though they only account for 12% of the population.
In 2016 there were 6676 murders in the USA, 3176 were committed by blacks and 3196 by whites. Blacks are only 12% but commit almost 50% of the murders. How is that possible?
And white account for the other half of the murders but are more than half at 61% of the population. In 2016 there were 777 interracial homicides. 553 were committed by Blacks. Why are blacks committing more homicides?
Statistics also show that about 68 to 85% of all interracial homicides are committed by Blacks even though they are only 12% of the population. Historically speaking black people are not more violent than white people so the present statistics of who is most violent has nothing to do with race.
So what is causing this extreme inequality in murder and violent crimes rates if it is not racial?
And what about police killings?
The FBI counted 435 “justifiable homicides” by police officers in 2016, and in 429 of the cases, the person had a firearm when killed.
Police have over 60,000,000 encounters every year with the public. They only arrest 10,000,000 annually, a number that has steadily gone down since 2006. Even though their job includes finding, capturing, and arresting some of the most violent murders, gangsters, thieves, and robbers in the nation they are able to do that with very few actual deaths. Police killed 1,165 people in 2018. Seeing that the police are called to get to the most dangerous part of town and confront the most desperate criminals in your community as quickly as possible it would seem that more people would likely die in a nation of 320,000,000 people.
On the other hand 250,000 people in the US are killed every year because of medical mistakes, making it the third-leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer.[11]
Even though there are about 883.7 million visits to Physicians[12] only 36,353,946 people are admitted to all U.S. Hospitals.[13]
Doctors are human, like policeman they make mistakes, "Roughly 12,000,000 Americans are misdiagnosed each year."[14]
While Doctors do have to deal with complex issues they are not endanger of being shot, stabbed or over powered by their patience when they are making their diagnosis. They have to make choices but do not have to chase their patience in dark streets or wrestle their patience to the ground, subdue them, and take them into custody while in life threatening situations. Still thousands die because of mistakes doctors make all the time.
In 2017, police killed 19 unarmed black males, down from 36 in 2015, according to The Washington Post. There were 66 police officers in 2016 were “feloniously” killed but 135 died in the line of duty.
How many lives do police officers save every year by direct action? How many do they save by their mere presence as a deterrent?
"A recent “deadly force” study by Washington State University researcher Lois James found that police officers were less likely to shoot unarmed black suspects than unarmed white or Hispanic ones in simulated threat scenarios. Harvard economics professor Roland Fryer analyzed more than 1,000 officer-involved shootings across the country. He concluded that there is zero evidence of racial bias in police shootings. In Houston, he found that blacks were 24 percent less likely than whites to be shot by officers even though the suspects were armed or violent." [https://www.facebook.com/127225910653607/posts/3236873216355512/Are the Police Racist? by Heather Mac Donald
If people look deeper into some of the same Race Statistics in America used by Phil Vischer and many others what conclusions do they draw as to the causality of problems seen in the Black community?
Do they see the police and racism as a source of the problem?
Have the policies of politicians undermined the culture and even the morality of society? Are they doing it now? Has "Legal charity" and the welfare state begun by men like FDR been the "lurking variable" that has been confounding society again as seen over and over throughout history?
The real cause of riots is Legal charity which divides communities, erodes the family and degenerates the people.
The crime, and therefore arrests, incarceration, and violent conflict in the Black community between each other and the police is not due to racism as much as it is due to the breakdown of the Black family.
We do not need to talk about race as much as we need to talk about why families are breaking down. There is certainly racism in the world today but after a hundred years of slavery and a pronounced system of slavery the Black families were never more strong. The Black community had 3% single parent families 40 years after slavery. A hundred years later 75% of black children are raised in a single parent family.
While many programs and practices can be mentioned that seem at first glance to correlate with community problems the actual cause must be somewhere else. If you have not properly identified the problem you cannot be expected to identify the solution.
An amazing fact is that the cause of societal decay has been known and well documented for centuries. The warnings are rampant in history that the people are weakened, even destroyed by the free bread provided by the power and authority of governments who force the contributions of the people.
But also the prophets, John the Baptist, and the apostles. And of course Christ himself directed his followers to not be like those benefactors who exercise authority through the willfulness of the people.
A remedy
"If you want to lift yourself up, lift up someone else." Booker T Washington
It is true that people need to care but they must do so in a way that "strengthens the poor"[15] and not in ways that degenerates their society and the people into perfect savages.
"I learned the lesson that great men cultivate love, and that only little men cherish a spirit of hatred. I learned that assistance given to the weak makes the one who gives it strong; and that oppression of the unfortunate makes one weak. – Booker T Washington
The election of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932 led to a shift of black voting loyalties from Republican to Democrat. As Roosevelt's New Deal programs seemed to offer economic relief to many Black and Whites suffering from the Great Depression.
"Few things can help an individual more than to place responsibility on him, and to let him know that you trust him." Booker T Washington
"The happiest people are those who do the most for others. The most miserable are those who do the least." – Booker T Washington
The goal of the enemy of liberty is to sow division amongst the people by killing care for one another in the hearts of the people and at the same time justifying legal charity through the State.
The goal of many like Cloward and Piven was to bankrupt America through over burdening the amoral social welfare system of the State.
Opening the borders is just putting the old plan on a faster track and still bring in some form of communism and totalitarianism.
If Americans would [[repent] of their own corruption found in their covetous practices and appetite for legal charity they could quickly resolve the border crisis and dissolve the corruption of government.
That turning to the [[dainties] of rulers alone undermined American conservative values which had focused on the rights endowed by the Creator upon the individual.
It would take many others directing this New Deal philosophy to the Black community that would make them the proverbial canary in the coal mine.
People like Saul Alinski with his Rules For Radicals and the Cloward-Piven Plan targeted the Black community in 1966 with the ideology of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis and eventually unleashing chaos and violence in the streets.
Cloward and Piven "proposed to create a crisis in the current welfare system – by exploiting the gap between welfare law and practice – that would ultimately bring about its collapse and replace it with a system of guaranteed annual income. They hoped to accomplish this end by informing the poor of their rights to welfare assistance, encouraging them to apply for benefits and, in effect, overloading an already overburdened bureaucracy." [16]
"Nothing ever comes to one, that is worth having, except as a result of hard work." Booker T Washington
The care that kills
Throughout history change creep into cultures and parasitically eat away at the heart of society. We see the problem growing in the small pockets of history like
Trajan of Rome who tried to fix the decline but misunderstood heart of the problem.
The solution to every problem requires that you drive a stake in the heart of the problem. That problem is not new to history but of course is our departure from what really made America great and the development of our amoral appetite for "legal charity".
Some people will admittedly understood that public welfare, like the free bread of Rome weakened the poor by providing an all too convenient social safety net which worked as an opiate of the people. [17]
The roots of the welfare state began with FDR and his New Deal. The socialism FDR foisted on Americans was expanded with the Great Society toward the Black community by LBJ to secure their vote. People like Cloward and Piven and many others used that welfare system to secure power for the democrats. This was all with a callous disregard for the individual, their families and their natural rights sold for government benefits.
Governments are created by man, not men by governments. You cannot legislate morality nor force charity and love unless you are willing to become a tyrant.
“If we want better people to make a better world, then we will have to begin where people are made in the family.” J.M. Braude.
Left and Right
You cannot repair nor cure the ills of society without respecting the rights endowed upon the individual and their family. It has been said that the right is about leave my stuff alone while the left is about leave my body alone. But in truth God, Moses and Christ said leave your neighbors stuff alone. Do not steal it nor even covet it and certainly make no agreements with others giving them your power to redistribute what you produce.
"Those who are happiest are those who do the most for others. – Booker T Washington
Some people believe that Christianity ceased to be viewed as a moral belief system in the world. That is actually impossible to be true with real Christianity. If some group or individual has ceased to be moral they have ceased to be Christian.
This is because a Christian by definition is a follower of Christ. If you are not following what He says is moral or righteous then you are not Christian.
This theme of loving power and position over the people and person has written the story of mankind from the dawn of history. Civilization have rose from the wilderness to perish at their own hands because the temptation of power over your fellowman is as great amongst the common man as it is with princes, politicians and potentates.
Like the love of the mammon of unrighteousness the wantonness of men for what their neighbor produces has repeated its tragic process throughout our ancient scripts and testaments. Since money is just a form of power both politics and economies will seduce the souls of men blinding them to the tragedy and trouble that awaits them down the path to destruction. Even Christ was tempted with the offer of power over others.
"Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch."Matthew 15:14
Almost 200 year ago when Americans thrived in Republics the solutions to liberty were well practiced and known if not understood by all. This was because 2000 years ago Jesus gave us the answer which was living by love, not force and many who made it to America could not have survived without submission to His Way.
With the rush to acquire the comforts and benefits promised by democracy the warnings of the prophets and poets of the past were soon forgotten.
Public and private alms-giving
"That the man who first ruined the Roman people twas he who first gave them treats and gratuities" Lucius Mestrius Plutarch's Life of Coriolanus, c. 100 AD. Cain, Nimrod, Pharaoh, Caesar and FDR all were those men who offered benefits to the people, taking power and the people's right to choose in payment. FDR's New Deal was an old deal that we should have seen coming.
“The measure of a man is what he does with power.” ― Plato"
Every man has power, power to choose. Men in their vanity and sloth will imagine they have a better idea than God about what is righteous and what is not. They can choose this way or that. We see this distinction of two system in the allegory of the ways of God and men found in the two altars Able, the good shepherd, and Cain the impatient plowman of mankind.
Long before Cain clubbed his brother he coveted what he saw as favor resulting from his sacrifice. We all have to sacrifice to create and provide for our family and friends. Sacrificing on an individual basis is a matter of daily choice but on a collective basis the choice of the individual may already be vested in another who makes those choices for him.
Individualism
Individualism is about taking care of yourself; it is the belief and practice that every individual is unique and should be self-reliant. Americans have been known for having a strong bent towards individualism because it was founded by people who sought the freedom to practice whatever religion they chose. Americanism prized itself on rugged individualism.[18]
The progressive socialist on his way to oppressive communism thinks he is bringing society together in a social justice[19] collective with the rhetoric of “inclusivity, equity and intersectionality” and says it desires unity. But, in fact, this philosophy by its own rules sows the seeds of division and with that the destruction of the individual.
Some will tell you that Ethical individualism "holds that the primary concern of morality is the individual, rather than society as a whole, and that morality primarily concerns individual flourishing, rather than one's interactions with others." But for an individual to be truly ethical he would have to care about his neighboring individual as much as he cares about himself.[20] This is because "Ethics" described as moral philosophy "is concerned with what is good for individuals and society."
Cultural determinism is the "ideas, meanings, beliefs, and values people learn as members of a society" at emotional and behavioral levels. While an individual may be on part a product of the culture in which he or she was born societies may contain more than one culture or a combination of cultures. All cultures are not created the same. Societies may create culture but it may also be created by the culture of individuals within it. If you alter the terms by which you describe the "ideas, meanings, beliefs, and values" of people and the structures and institutions of society you can alter the people themselves and what they believe to be a moral and ethical behavior.
“So for the postmodernists, the world is a Hobbesian battleground of identity groups. They do not communicate with one another, because they can't. All there is, is a struggle for power, and if you're in the predator group, which means you're an oppressor, then you better look out, because you're not exactly welcome.” Jordan Peterson, video.
We see that Jordan Peterson claims that "...French intellectuals in particular just pulled off a sleight of hand and transformed Marxism into post-modern identity politics." The moral obligation of the moderate leftists
The true oppressors are the socialist. Not at first but eventually they get around to it. "Social democracy is a socialist system of government achieved by democratic means. And Socialism is a, "political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole." The "means of production" would be anything you gather, make, build, establish will be 'distributed, and exchanged... owned or regulated by' someone else's power of choice.
Another expression of that theory of "Social democracy is an ideology that has similar values to socialism, but within a capitalist framework. The ideology, named from democracy where people have a say in government actions, supports a competitive economy with money while also helping people whose jobs don't pay a lot." The "also helping people whose jobs don't pay a lot" factor of social democracy again gives someone other than you the power of distribute and take from the members.
Small homogeneous social democracies can work for awhile but the bigger the social democracy the more power may be vested in the takers and distributors. Power corrupts.
Eventually we see that power grow. They could force the offerings of the people which Samuel told Saul was foolish. Eventually, they had the power to decide what was good and evil for the people and the people were so divided and degenerated they could not remove their oppressors. Polybius prophesied the process of degeneration of the people 100 years before the first Caesar rose to power.
The alternative is seen in the history before rulers rose to power and after they were driven out. Unfortunately, the true history of the success is often interred with their bones when they forget the wisdom of the righteousness of God. When men began to become slothful in the ways of righteousness and love for their neighbor or become just slothful but greedy for gain at the expense of their neighbor society begins to be changed.
“At the final moment, when social democracy draws its consequences, the state will put it cannons to work. ...the representatives of authority will always reach for measures of force in the end.” 1898 Rudolf Steiner's letter to Individualist Anarchist John Henry Mackay
Nation of individuals
In a nation of individuals every-man can do what is right in his own eyes but there needs to be a united group of ethical or righteous individuals. The question is what unites them and whose righteous is central to their union?
The natural man has an individual power of choice divided equally among men.[21] It is said that we are endowed by our creator with those inalienable rights to choose. We are also endowed by our pro-creators with some of the rights we may possess and enjoy but also some of the responsibilities and debt may also be ours.
What did Jesus say about social justice?
“Learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, and please the widow's cause,” (Isaiah 1:17). “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” (Micah 6:8).
(https://sharedhope.org/2018/06/04/biblical-justice-and-social-justice/)
Alexis de Tocqueville did an extensive survey of America to find out the secret of its success. He believed that it was not only the willingness of Americans to sacrifice their sweat and blood, their toil and wealth for the welfare of others that made them great but he knew that as Americans strayed from private and personal sacrifice into the world of government sponsored welfare programs there would be irrevocable consequences.
"It is at this stage that ‘public charity’ or ‘legal charity’[22] (relief or welfare as we now say) begins to supplement the private, voluntary charity that was the traditional form of assistance to the poor. And it is here that we confront the ultimate irony of history:the unforeseen and unfortunate consequences of good intentions." Alexis de Tocqueville’s Memoir on Pauperism translated by Seymour Drescher page 30.
Since, religion included your duty to your fellowman, and not just what you thought about God, ‘public charity’ or ‘legal charity’, like public religion, would spot the very souls of Americans and blind them to the real goal of the gospel to set men free. Public charity is the antitheses of Pure Religion. To be pure your charity must be "unspotted by the world" which uses force[23] like Cain and all the nations of the world. While all the prophets told us the same thing warning us over and over, Alexis de Tocqueville clarified the reason behind those warnings:
"[I]ndividual alms-giving established valuable ties between the rich and the poor. The deed itself involves the giver in the fate of the one whose poverty he has undertaken to alleviate. The latter, supported by aid which he had no right to demand and which he had no hope to getting, feels inspired by gratitude. A moral tie is established between those two classes whose interests and passions so often conspire to separate them from each other, and although divided by circumstance they are willingly reconciled." Alexis de Tocqueville, the author of "Democracy in America".
Moses' nation of Israel was supported by freewill offerings of the people through a network of voluntary actions and contributions to ministers, called Levites, who met basic requirements laid out in the scriptures. There were no compelled taxes until after the people went against the wisdom and warnings of God and elected a ruler in 1 Samuel 8.
The free nation generated by the unselfish generosity of the people in a daily ministration of charity can maintain liberty because society is united by their unselfish practices and remain strong and viable. Strangers and pilgrims tried a common warehouse according to the socialist ideology of from each according to their need and to each according to their need. They quickly understood that "legal charity" they tried at New Plymouth and Jamestown undermined society and brought famine and death. Fortunately, they quickly applied the principle of 2 Thessalonians 3:10 "For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat."
Alexis de Tocqueville continued defining the important distinction between individual alms-giving and what he calls legal charity or Public alms:
"This is not the case with legal charity.[22]The latter allows the alms to persist but removes its morality. The law strips the man of wealth of a part of his surplus without consulting him, and he sees the poor man only as a greedy stranger invited by the legislator to share his wealth. The poor man, on the other hand, feels no gratitude for a benefit that no one can refuse him and that could not satisfy him in any case. Public alms guarantee life but do not make it happier or more comfortable than individual alms-giving; legal charity does not thereby eliminate wealth or poverty in society. One class still views the world with fear and loathing while the other regards its misfortune with despair and envy. Far from uniting these two rival nations, who have existed since the beginning of the world and who are called the rich and poor, into a single people, it breaks the only link which could be established between them. It ranges each one under a banner, tallies them, and, bringing them face to face, prepares them for combat." Alexis de Tocqueville, the author of "Democracy in America".
Progressive movement
"Let us summarize in a few words. The progressive movement of modern civilization will gradually and in a roughly increasing proportion raise the number of those who are forced to turn to charity."[24]
During the massive worldwide shutdown of economies, businesses and the strangling of the rights of the people under the guise of the Coronavirus pandemic more people were pushed onto the government dole than ever before. The people were not forced to turn to charity but to the government's hand out, which may be called "legal charity" but is nothing more than the Corban of the Pharisees, the wages of unrighteousness, or the welfare of the benefactors who exercise authority.
Repent! Think differently with such faith that you act differently in a more righteous manner.
"Legal alms comes to mind first—legal alms in all forms—sometimes unconditional, sometimes hidden in the disguise of a wage. Sometimes it is accidental and temporary, at other times regular and permanent. But intensive investigation quickly demonstrates that this remedy, which seems both so natural and so effective, is a very dangerous expedient. It affords only a false and momentary sop to individual suffering, and however used it inflames society’s sores.[25]" [24]
"We are left with individual charity. It can produce only useful results. Its very weakness is a guarantee against dangerous consequences. It alleviates many miseries and breeds none. But individual charity seems quite weak when faced with the progressive development of the industrial classes and all the evils which civilisation joins to the inestimable goods it produces. It was sufficient for the Middle Ages, when religious enthusiasm gave it enormous energy, and when its task was less difficult; could it be sufficient today when the burden is heavy and when its forces are so weakened?"[24]
"Individual charity is a powerful agency that must not be despised, but it would be imprudent to rely on it. It is but a single means and cannot be the only one. Then what is to be done? In what direction can we look? How can we mitigate what we can foresee, but not cure?" [24]
We could actually do what Christ said in seeking the kingdom of God and His righteous ways. We could do what he commanded and ministers could conform to His requirements for a change.
"Any measure which establishes legal charity on a permanent basis and gives it an administrative form thereby creates an idle and lazy class, living at the expense of the industrial and working class. This, at least, is its inevitable consequence if not the immediate result."[24]
This is the way of Cain, Nimrod, Balaam, and the Nicolaitan and of course it is the Corban of the Pharisees and Herod which God hates because it makes the word of God to none effect and like Sodom it does not strengthen the poor:
"It reproduces all the vices of the monastic system, minus the high ideals of morality and religion which often went along with it. Such a law is a bad seed planted in the legal structure."[24]
But again the morality of religion includes the limitations of Pure Religion which is dictated by the morality of Christ and the righteousness of God which does not allow us the self-righteous justifications of the covetous practices of the world nor the Corban of the Pharisees because they make the word of God to none effect in our hearts and minds and in our society.
"Circumstances, as in America, can prevent the seed from developing rapidly, but they cannot destroy it, and if the present generation escapes its influence, it will devour the well-being of generations to come." [24]
The New Deal of FDR and the Great Society of LBJ, and the Cloward-Piven Strategy promoted by progressive Social democrats desiring One purse or the slothful conservatives have all "sow the seeds of discord and destruction".[26]
Legislative charity
There is an elephant in the room of modern politics and neither party wants to see it but both of them feed it. Because they will not question the moral conflict and hypocrisy of any societal dependance opon "legal charity" provided through the power of the State the masses which compose Society degenerates and the State becomes a tyrant and a beast.
Even the eyes of the public have scales on them when it comes to addressing the source of all the problems facing the world today, for "legal charity" is not only a "destroyer of liberty"[27] it is consumer of souls[28] and a ruiner of mankind.[29]
We have added general links that may help individuals to navigate through an abundance of resources aimed at responsible living in a parallel society based on the perfect law of liberty which sets the captive free.
Homeless
Israel, meaning the Israelites, found themselves homeless when they were kicked out of Egypt in Exodus. They managed to care for the needs of their society through faith, hope, and charity.
Early Christians and Jews were cast out of Rome by Claudius and the next thing we know is that Paul went back into the tent-making business.[30] When Jerusalem was destroyed thousands left while Titus's army surrounded it.
Those people who left were stripped of all their possessions and money by the rebellious Jews who had just seized control of the city and recently had thrown James, the overseer of the church at Jerusalem during that time, from one of its walls.
Most of those people were probably Christians who then left before it's destruction. They suddenly found themselves destitute and homeless because of their faith.
Through out the ages, people have often become homeless through no fault of their own. Read more...
James Madison may have thought, "Whenever a youth is ascertained to possess talents meriting an education which his parents cannot afford, he should be carried forward at the public expense." But the idea of everyone getting free education at the "public expense" through taxation does not fall solely under that description legislative charity.
In fact, James Madison also said that "Charity is no part of the legislative duty of government."
Tocqueville saw Madison’s endorsement of factions as countervailing powers. Tocqueville having reading The Federalist embraced Madison’s views of "factionalism" as a protection against despotism, he developed his theory of charitable free associations which allow for a dependance upon an alternative society not dependents upon the "legal charity" of the legislature.
Since, the masses have always been degenerated by an appetite for benefits and the habit of receiving them at the expense of others can we the people afford "public education" or any "public welfare" at any price?
"Moreover, society is better served by private than public charity. Where individual, voluntary charity establishes a ‘moral tie’ between the giver and the receiver, legal charity removes any element of morality from the transaction. The donor (the taxpayer) resents his involuntary contribution, and the recipient feels no gratitude for what he gets as a matter of right and which in any case he feels to be insufficient." Introduction Gertrude Himmelfarb, Alexis de Tocqueville’s Memoir on Pauperism translated by Seymour Drescher
Only a moral society can remain a free society. The most ancient test for morality is do the people equally care about their neighbor as much as they care about themselves?
In America back in the 17' and 1800s the top schools, like Harvard and Princeton, were available for rich and poor. It was written into many college charters that no one was turned away because of poverty.
Alexis Tocqueville came to America in the 1800 s to discover the cause of its success.
"Americans group together to hold fêtes, found seminaries, build inns, construct churches, distribute books, dispatch missionaries... They establish hospitals, prisons, schools by the same method." He also wrote, "I have seen Americans making great and sincere sacrifices for the key common good and a hundred times I have noticed that, when needs be, they almost always gave each other faithful support" (Tocqueville 1840,).
So, the American social safety net and therefore its greatness arose, not out of government institutions of power and force but it was all done through charitable association.
"Private charity may seem weaker than public charity because it provides no sustained and certain help for the poor. In one sense, however, this is its strength, for it is precisely its temporary and voluntary character that enables it to alleviate many miseries without breeding others. But it is also a problem, for the private charity that was sufficient in the Middle Ages may be insufficient in the present industrial age. This is the question that now confronts society. If public charity is unsatisfactory and private charity inadequate, how can this new kind of pauperism be averted so that the working classes do not ‘curse the prosperity that they produce?’" Introduction Gertrude Himmelfarb, Alexis de Tocqueville’s Memoir on Pauperism translated by Seymour Drescher
Local schools, roads, and hospitals and asylums were built by the militia and through charitable contributions. The militia was "every able-bodied male between 17 and 45" both rich and poor.
There was little or no class struggle in most of America.
At the beginning of the twentieth century Americans began to move away from those moral practices of charity that brought them together in many areas of life and either through apathy or ambition looked more to government and less to one another.
Without the daily practice of charity a move toward force as means of a social safety net will be inevitable.
If Austria or any people were already in a moral decline with a divided educational system and resorting to government force was the only path they were willing to select they have already sealed their fate. It may have been comfortable but not righteous. It may satisfy today's needs but things will change and the prophecy of Polybius, the historian of historians, will repeat itself.
Alexis said that he "recognize not only the utility but the necessity of public charity applied to inevitable evils such as the helplessness of infancy, the decrepitude of old age, sickness, insanity." He even admitted that "its temporary usefulness in times of public calamities which God sometimes allows to slip from his hand, proclaiming his anger to the nations. State alms are then as spontaneous as unforeseen, as temporary as the evil itself."[31] But Horatio Bunce[32] and David Crockett and even Jesus Christ would disagree.
The problem is the calamities of this life do not slip through the fingers of God. it is at those very times that the people of God must cling most ardently to His way of righteousness and do no evil imagining that the end justifies the means.
In writing a constitution we were to seriously limit the power of governments to exercise authority.[33] But if the masses grant power to that same government to obtain benefits for our personal gain and welfare at the expense of our neighbor we will only magnify the problems of the world and degenerate our heart and mind.
Giving money and power to the political cast of society to fix the problem of the world magnifies the problem. If we recognize the cause of the problems we should be able to resolve them with right reason and a contrite heart.
The reason we have come to this modern crisis in the world is because of a hundred years of legal charity which has degenerated the masses so they know not right reason nor do they have a contrite heart.
The paradox of the term public charity itself defiles the senses if not the souls of men. While it may be right to give charity, no one has a right to demand charity. To do so would destroy the blessings of charity and the liberty[34] it was meant to provide.
"‘Right’ itself is an elevating and inspiring idea. ‘There is something great and virile in the idea of right which removes from any request its suppliant character, and places the one who claims it on the same level as the one who grants it.’ (p. 30) But a right to public charity, unlike other rights, degrades the man who claims it by condemning him to a life of dependency and idleness."[35] Introduction Gertrude Himmelfarb, Alexis de Tocqueville’s Memoir on Pauperism translated by Seymour Drescher page 36.
Alexis presses forth with his own paradox segregating "permanent" and "regular" from the "temporary usefulness" of public charity. Is robbery and rape less robbery and rape, or adultery less adultery because you do it only occasionally? The same is true of national adultery, covetous practices or the exercise of pure Religion. Besides, how many addictions begin with what was to only be a temporary or occasional indulgence?
Besides the degeneration of the people and the robbing them of the right to give charity which undermines the natural and moral flow off charity there is the degradation and alienation of the rich and the poor.
"But I am deeply convinced that any administrative system whose aim will be to provide for the needs of the poor, will breed more miseries than it can cure, will deprave the population that it wants to help and comfort, will in time reduce the rich to being no more than the tenant-farmers of the poor, will dry up the sources of savings, will stop the accumulation of capital, will retard the development of trade, will benumb human industry and activity, and will culminate by bringing about a violent revolution in the State, when the number of those who receive alms will have become as large as those who give it, and the indigent, no longer being able to take from the impoverished rich the means of providing for his needs, will find it easier to plunder them of all their property at one stroke than to ask for their help." Alexis de Tocqueville’s Memoir on Pauperism translated by Seymour Drescher page 37.
The reason Americans vote against universal healthcare is, or should be, because some Americans still understand that universal healthcare is universal force and the centralization of power and the loss of individual choice. They know this leads to despotism and tyranny by appealing to our own beast nature so that we become willing to take a bite out of our neighbor's or even our children's future paycheck to obtain benefits today.
This American movement toward socialism over the last 100 years has allowed the nation to be divided into two divisions, those who have eyes to see and ears to hear and those who do not.
Like Polybius correctly foretold over 2000 years ago it degenerates the people over time into "perfect savages" once they become accustomed to living at the expense of others.
Obviously some do not want universal healthcare because there will be an increase in taxation and some also know that the quality and availability of care will go down.
Unquestionably, statistics show that conservatives are far more generous when it comes to giving to charity out of their own pockets and liberals are far more generous in giving out of someone else's pockets.
The United States ranks in the top three countries of the world on the charitable index with Myanmar and Australia. Sweden and Austria ranking in at 25th and 30th respectively because they have turned to accepting the covetous practices of Socialism over private and individual charity. Venezuela and Russia who take the 117th and 126th places respectively show us what direction societies and nations are headed in when they go the way of the socialist State.
Others like Dr. Nesbit associate professor of public administration and policy at the University of Georgia will argue that “The evidence shows that private philanthropy can’t compensate for the loss of government provision.”
While she will readily admit that Republicans prefer to “provide for the collective good through private institutions" Dr. Nesbit went on to say, "It’s not equal. What government can put into these things is so much more than what we see through private philanthropy." But what the good Doctor and people fail to realize is that government only puts into universal healthcare what it takes by force from others. This makes the State stronger and the people morally weaker. And because all governments of the world borrow from future generations to provide a plethora of benefits these system of "legal charity" curse children.
How the Government Turns American Indians into Freeloaders. The Lumbee say that reservations are training the native Americans to be communists. Is that what FDR started that moved the black community from Republican to Democrat? Time 8:38
5 Ways The Government Keeps Native Americans In Poverty - John Stossel ~ Why Are Indians Poor? Private property rights through capitalism is essential for prosperity. https://youtu.be/GCD26PzR6AA Time 7:03
↑Exodus 5:7 Ye shall no more give the people straw to make brick, as heretofore: let them go and gather straw for themselves.
↑Some suggest that the "covenant of brethren " mentioned in Amos 1 was the league made between Hiram and David, and afterwards between Hiram and Solomon (2 Samuel 5:11; 1 Kings 5:1; 1 Kings 5:12 )but the true brotherly covenant dates back when there was no king in Israel and the people were bound together by the practice of pure religion. Ezekiel 16:49 "Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy." This was an indictment of Israel because it failed to abide by Leviticus 25:35 "And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: [yea, though he be] a stranger, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee." when the people turned to the legal charity offered by men who exercise authority like Cain, Nimrod, and FDR rather that the freewill offerings provided by the fervent charity of The Way.
↑Exodus 23:9 “Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger... seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.”
Leviticus 25:17 “Ye shall not therefore oppress one another; but thou shalt fear thy God: for I [am] the LORD your God.”
↑""he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it's most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, & murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another." The list of usurpations listed in the first draught of the Declaration of Independence. This paragraph was stricken by North Carolina and Georgia.
↑Psalms 119:45 “And I will walk at liberty: for I seek thy precepts.”
↑ This quote was attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville in the book The Kingdom of God and the American Dream by Sherwood Eddy which was published in 1941.
It appeared again on November 3, 1952 in a final campaign address in Boston by Dwight D. Eisenhower.
It similarly was quoted in A Third Treasury of the Familiar by Ralph L. Woods, published in 1970.
Presidents Reagan, and even Bill Clinton among many others have quoted the line not just because they thought Alexis wrote it but because they believed it was true.
Andrew Reed and James Matheson while traveling through America in 1834 did write an almost identical quote in meaning: “America will be great if America is good. If not, her greatness will vanish away like a morning cloud.” "A Narrative of the Visit to the American Churches": By the Deputation from the Congregation Union of England and Wales, (Vol. II). by Andrew Reed and James Matheson, Harper & Brothers, 1835.
↑Exodus 20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.
Deuteronomy 5:21 Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour’s wife, neither shalt thou covet thy neighbour’s house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbour’s.
Romans 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
↑"Not necessity, not desire - no, the love of power is the demon of men. Let them have everything - health, food, a place to live, entertainment - they are and remain unhappy and low-spirited: for the demon waits and waits and will be satisfied." Friedrich Nietzsche
↑Ezekiel 16:49 "Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy." This was an indictment of Israel because it failed to abide by Leviticus 25:35 "And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: [yea, though he be] a stranger, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee."
↑Michael Reisch and Janice Andrews wrote in the book The Road Not Taken. Brunner Routledge. pp. 144–146. ISBN 1-58391-025-5.
↑Rugged individualism "whereby an individual is totally self-reliant and independent from outside, usually state or government, assistance."
↑"Social justice is a political and philosophical theory which asserts that there are dimensions to the concept of justice beyond those embodied in the principles of civil or criminal law, economic supply and demand, or traditional moral frameworks."
↑Leviticus 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.
Matthew 5:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
Matthew 19:19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Matthew 22:39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Mark 12:31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.
Romans 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Galatians 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
James 2:8 If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:
↑“Freedom is the Right to Choose, the Right to create for oneself the alternatives of Choice. Without the possibility of Choice, and the exercise of Choice, a man is not a man but a member, an instrument, a thing.” Archibald MacLeish
↑ 22.022.122.2Legal Charity is Relief dispensed under the Poor Laws; charity given to the poor by force of law. Early 19th century; earliest use found in The Edinburgh Review "So that the legal charity , it would appear , does not supersede the gratuitous charity, though it certainly serves very much to limit and to discourage it."
↑Matthew 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.
Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets [were] until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
↑"And I heard a great voice out of the temple saying to the seven angels, Go your ways, and pour out the vials of the wrath of God upon the earth. And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore (helkos from 1670 and the Mark of the Beast, and [upon] them which worshipped his image."Revelation 16:1, 2
↑seeds of discord is simply creating bitterness and enmity among people in a group or even the society with words and institutions.
↑“The real destroyers of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations, and benefits.” Plutarch
↑1 Timothy 4:1 ¶ Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;"
"And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth." Luke 12:15
↑"That the man who first ruined the Roman people twas he who first gave them treats and gratuities" Life of Coriolanus (c. 100 AD.)
↑"And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers."
Acts 18:3
↑"Congress has no right to give charity... It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people."
"That the man who first ruined the Roman people twas he who first gave them treats and gratuities. But this mischief crept secretly and gradually in, and did not openly make it's appearance in Rome for a considerable time." Plutarch's Life of Coriolanus (c. 100 AD.) This would include Julius Caesar and eventually Augustus Caesar which is why Plutarch also reported, “The real destroyers of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations, and benefits.” This was a major theme of the Bible:
