What ever happened to imaginative play?
Click on the title above to read an eye-opening article about change in child's play over the past six decades and the connection to the social ills of today.
Families that Discuss together, stay together
Families that Discuss together, stay together
Monday, December 28, 2009
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
What Is More Important For An Economy—Liberty or Equality?
.
The desire for equality comes from within man, not his government. Every parent observes that each child wants to have either a larger portion or an equal piece of brownie. Although Human nature passionately desires liberty, it more diligently seeks and loves the idea of equality. Tocqueville penned the truth that the more equal men are; the more insatiable will be their longing for equality. Even a small degree of liberty will satisfy man, but no amount of equality will ever be enough. At first government will allow equality and later they promote it through special interest regulations under the seemingly harmless guise of socialism.
What do democracy and socialism have in common? “Equality,” says Tocqueville, “but while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” Gradually, the coveted equality turns against a people as government intervenes at a continually increasing rate to grant equality at the price of liberty. In their book, Free to Choose, Milton and Rose Friedman explore three levels of equality. These are equality before God, equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. The first two kinds of equalities did not limit freedoms, but expanded them to be greater than ever in the history of the world during our Nation’s founding and beyond. Since the early decades of the last century a new kind of equality has emerged that is destroying our freedoms—it is the equality of outcome. Let us explore deeper into the different levels of equality to understand their effect on the human race.
During the United States’ founding period it was the equality before God that was desperately sought to break free from an increasingly oppressive government. Inspired by John Locke and other great thinkers of the past, Thomas Jefferson composed the Declaration of Independence to proclaim that all men are created equal. The indicator to Jefferson’s intent is phrased in the famous preamble,“[that all men are] endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” Man was given the liberty to shape his own life and serve his own purposes, provided he did not interfere with similar rights of others. Invading these God-given rights was to be prohibited; therefore, government was instituted to protect these rights.
Conflict between the Declaration of Independence and slavery took center stage until finally resolved by the Civil War. Jefferson agonized over the tyranny of slavery in his notebooks and correspondences. He pondered over solutions to eliminate it. Similarly many of us today agonize over the enslaving power of the welfare system and of its ineffectiveness and degradation of the human soul, but in like manner to Jefferson, we ponder the ways it could be eliminated and find that it seems virtually impossible. Terminating welfare immediately by legislation may cause a war, but could it be phased out gradually? Will we have another civil war? Not likely, however it is quite possible to have a great many statesmen who will rise up and lead us out of the quagmire.
Shortly after the Civil War greater opportunity for all men provided a new equality never before enjoyed by men of all races—it was the equality of opportunity. It would not be an equal opportunity of “identity” in the sense of an individual’s geographical location; whether there existed a careful or neglectful upbringing; or whether there were limitations of or lack of birth defects. Equal opportunities would mean that “no one should be prevented by arbitrary obstacles from using his capacities to pursue his own objectives… and from achieving those positions for which their talents fit them and which their values lead them to seek. Not birth, nationality, color, religion, sex, nor any other irrelevant characteristic should determine the opportunities that are open to a person—only his abilities” (Friedman). The “melting pot” of all races, religions and culture shows evidence of the vast equal opportunity available in the United States. After the Civil War an explosion of free market ideas promoted extraordinary expansion of free enterprise, competition and laissez-faire. Writes Friedman, “Everyone was to be free to go into any business, follow any occupation, buy any property, subject only to the agreement of the other parties to the transaction. Each was to have the opportunity to reap the benefits if he succeeded, to suffer the costs if he failed. There were to be no arbitrary obstacles. Performance, not birth, religion, or nationality, was the touchstone.” Wealth increased exponentially and charitable activity abounded with non-profit hospitals, charitable foundations and privately endowed colleges and universities.
Equality before God and equality of opportunity provided favorable conditions for freedom and liberty to prosper. We find that when liberty and freedom existed people were allowed to live according to the dictates of their conscience. The society would become a mixture of abundance and poverty, charity and unkindness, master and laborer, honest and dishonest. Not aware they were trading freedom for their security, the people went grappling to the government for security against the “appalling activities of the corrupted”. The security they desired was in the name of socialism. It would be a system that would promote the good of and for all people. Tocqueville feared that a democracy carried too far might undermine civic virtue and replace it with social servitude, "There is a manly and lawful passion for equality which incites men to wish all to be powerful and honored. This passion tends to elevate the humble to the rank of the great; but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level, and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom.” No longer satisfied with the freedom and liberty of the first two levels of equality, the people desired a third equality that would threaten and destroy liberty, but that would ensure security. Just as the child desires an equal piece of brownie, the masses desired the security of having an equal outcome of everything. Tocqueville observed that the chief passion, which stirs men, is the love of equality of conditions.
In the last 60 years our nation has increasingly gravitated toward the security of equal outcome. “Everyone should have the same level of living or of income, [and] should finish the race at the same time.” write the Friedman’s. “As the Dodo said in Alice and Wonderland, ‘everybody has won, and all must have prizes.’” The goal today is the vague notion of fairness. There is a belief among many that some companies have an unfair hold on the market, that some children are unfairly abused, that some youth do not have the “fair” opportunity to go to college, or that some special interest group is not recognized fairly as it should be. Under this false notion of fairness the government must grow stronger and more comprehensive to make things more and more “fair” as the rapacious special interest groups grovel for more. “It becomes regularly necessary to qualify legal provisions increasingly by reference to what is ‘fair’ or ‘reasonable,’” says F. A. Hayek of increased government intervention. The Friedman’s continue, “’Fair shares for all’ is the modern slogan that has replaced Karl Marx’s, ‘To each according to his needs, from each according to his ability.’” Who decides what is fair? Who is to give the prizes? The people, having given up the liberty to choose for the want of security, have now delegated this power to the state. The state can now divide up our land, income and possessions and give it as “prizes” to others who “deserve” it. Surrendering our freedoms over to the increasingly paternal government, we gain what seems to be an increasing equality of outcome, but in reality, the disparity between the rich and the poor becomes greater and will eventually destroy the middle class. Reality is more like George Orwell’s Animal Farm where, “all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”
Fearing anarchy, the masses tend toward socialism feeling that the socialist pathway is a recipe for “the good of all.” Yet, in the end the talented have lost the incentive to achieve and the mediocre have been rewarded—all are in a decadent decline towards destruction. Tocqueville warns that “anarchy is not the greatest of the ills to be feared in democratic nation, but the greatest of ills will be the careful downward path to servitude. As equality increases and is never quenched, slowly the freedom will be.”
Many are beginning to look at security, or equality of outcome, with increased apprehension. Have they sensed the reality that this level of equality is squelching our delicate freedoms? Has it been leading us down the path of socialism? Is the collectivist creed destroying our democracy? If so, where did we go wrong? What turned us down the path of servitude? Perhaps we find our answer at the beginning of this article. I commenced by stating that no amount of equality will be enough for man. Later in our study of the three levels of equality we saw that our passion for equality will increase infinitely until we have destroyed our freedoms. The solution is as simple as instilling knowledge to the child who wants an equal piece of brownie. Virtues and ethics are learned; character is built; patience, kindness and charity are impressed upon the young heart. People without the knowledge of what Thomas Jefferson truly meant about equality have interpreted it to mean equality of outcome. Lack of knowledge is perhaps the main cause for our economic catastrophe today. Tocqueville suggests that we seek our education from the classics, “All who have ambitions to literary excellence in democratic nations should ever refresh themselves at classical springs; that is the most wholesome medicine for the mind. Not that I hold the classics beyond criticism, but I think that they have special merits well calculated to counterbalance our peculiar defects. They provide a prop just where we are most likely to fall.” It may be easier to be trained for a career at the local university, but it is essential for our freedoms that we be immersed in a lifelong education in the liberal arts.
Above, I mentioned the possibility of Statesmen leading us out of the quagmire of the welfare state. Statesmen build their character upon the high moral virtues found in the ancient and modern classics. Some are formally educated in the universities and some are self-educated from the mentor/authors of the classics, but both learn to understand human nature and the history of cause and effect. They are empowered with the knowledge that restores and maintains freedoms. It is essential that we relearn our true history and understand human nature or continue on the path of servitude and ignorance. Whether we have the statesmen to lead us out of our predicament or not depends upon the reader. What is more important to you—Liberty or equality?
The desire for equality comes from within man, not his government. Every parent observes that each child wants to have either a larger portion or an equal piece of brownie. Although Human nature passionately desires liberty, it more diligently seeks and loves the idea of equality. Tocqueville penned the truth that the more equal men are; the more insatiable will be their longing for equality. Even a small degree of liberty will satisfy man, but no amount of equality will ever be enough. At first government will allow equality and later they promote it through special interest regulations under the seemingly harmless guise of socialism.
What do democracy and socialism have in common? “Equality,” says Tocqueville, “but while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” Gradually, the coveted equality turns against a people as government intervenes at a continually increasing rate to grant equality at the price of liberty. In their book, Free to Choose, Milton and Rose Friedman explore three levels of equality. These are equality before God, equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. The first two kinds of equalities did not limit freedoms, but expanded them to be greater than ever in the history of the world during our Nation’s founding and beyond. Since the early decades of the last century a new kind of equality has emerged that is destroying our freedoms—it is the equality of outcome. Let us explore deeper into the different levels of equality to understand their effect on the human race.
During the United States’ founding period it was the equality before God that was desperately sought to break free from an increasingly oppressive government. Inspired by John Locke and other great thinkers of the past, Thomas Jefferson composed the Declaration of Independence to proclaim that all men are created equal. The indicator to Jefferson’s intent is phrased in the famous preamble,“[that all men are] endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” Man was given the liberty to shape his own life and serve his own purposes, provided he did not interfere with similar rights of others. Invading these God-given rights was to be prohibited; therefore, government was instituted to protect these rights.
Conflict between the Declaration of Independence and slavery took center stage until finally resolved by the Civil War. Jefferson agonized over the tyranny of slavery in his notebooks and correspondences. He pondered over solutions to eliminate it. Similarly many of us today agonize over the enslaving power of the welfare system and of its ineffectiveness and degradation of the human soul, but in like manner to Jefferson, we ponder the ways it could be eliminated and find that it seems virtually impossible. Terminating welfare immediately by legislation may cause a war, but could it be phased out gradually? Will we have another civil war? Not likely, however it is quite possible to have a great many statesmen who will rise up and lead us out of the quagmire.
Shortly after the Civil War greater opportunity for all men provided a new equality never before enjoyed by men of all races—it was the equality of opportunity. It would not be an equal opportunity of “identity” in the sense of an individual’s geographical location; whether there existed a careful or neglectful upbringing; or whether there were limitations of or lack of birth defects. Equal opportunities would mean that “no one should be prevented by arbitrary obstacles from using his capacities to pursue his own objectives… and from achieving those positions for which their talents fit them and which their values lead them to seek. Not birth, nationality, color, religion, sex, nor any other irrelevant characteristic should determine the opportunities that are open to a person—only his abilities” (Friedman). The “melting pot” of all races, religions and culture shows evidence of the vast equal opportunity available in the United States. After the Civil War an explosion of free market ideas promoted extraordinary expansion of free enterprise, competition and laissez-faire. Writes Friedman, “Everyone was to be free to go into any business, follow any occupation, buy any property, subject only to the agreement of the other parties to the transaction. Each was to have the opportunity to reap the benefits if he succeeded, to suffer the costs if he failed. There were to be no arbitrary obstacles. Performance, not birth, religion, or nationality, was the touchstone.” Wealth increased exponentially and charitable activity abounded with non-profit hospitals, charitable foundations and privately endowed colleges and universities.
Equality before God and equality of opportunity provided favorable conditions for freedom and liberty to prosper. We find that when liberty and freedom existed people were allowed to live according to the dictates of their conscience. The society would become a mixture of abundance and poverty, charity and unkindness, master and laborer, honest and dishonest. Not aware they were trading freedom for their security, the people went grappling to the government for security against the “appalling activities of the corrupted”. The security they desired was in the name of socialism. It would be a system that would promote the good of and for all people. Tocqueville feared that a democracy carried too far might undermine civic virtue and replace it with social servitude, "There is a manly and lawful passion for equality which incites men to wish all to be powerful and honored. This passion tends to elevate the humble to the rank of the great; but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level, and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom.” No longer satisfied with the freedom and liberty of the first two levels of equality, the people desired a third equality that would threaten and destroy liberty, but that would ensure security. Just as the child desires an equal piece of brownie, the masses desired the security of having an equal outcome of everything. Tocqueville observed that the chief passion, which stirs men, is the love of equality of conditions.
In the last 60 years our nation has increasingly gravitated toward the security of equal outcome. “Everyone should have the same level of living or of income, [and] should finish the race at the same time.” write the Friedman’s. “As the Dodo said in Alice and Wonderland, ‘everybody has won, and all must have prizes.’” The goal today is the vague notion of fairness. There is a belief among many that some companies have an unfair hold on the market, that some children are unfairly abused, that some youth do not have the “fair” opportunity to go to college, or that some special interest group is not recognized fairly as it should be. Under this false notion of fairness the government must grow stronger and more comprehensive to make things more and more “fair” as the rapacious special interest groups grovel for more. “It becomes regularly necessary to qualify legal provisions increasingly by reference to what is ‘fair’ or ‘reasonable,’” says F. A. Hayek of increased government intervention. The Friedman’s continue, “’Fair shares for all’ is the modern slogan that has replaced Karl Marx’s, ‘To each according to his needs, from each according to his ability.’” Who decides what is fair? Who is to give the prizes? The people, having given up the liberty to choose for the want of security, have now delegated this power to the state. The state can now divide up our land, income and possessions and give it as “prizes” to others who “deserve” it. Surrendering our freedoms over to the increasingly paternal government, we gain what seems to be an increasing equality of outcome, but in reality, the disparity between the rich and the poor becomes greater and will eventually destroy the middle class. Reality is more like George Orwell’s Animal Farm where, “all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”
Fearing anarchy, the masses tend toward socialism feeling that the socialist pathway is a recipe for “the good of all.” Yet, in the end the talented have lost the incentive to achieve and the mediocre have been rewarded—all are in a decadent decline towards destruction. Tocqueville warns that “anarchy is not the greatest of the ills to be feared in democratic nation, but the greatest of ills will be the careful downward path to servitude. As equality increases and is never quenched, slowly the freedom will be.”
Many are beginning to look at security, or equality of outcome, with increased apprehension. Have they sensed the reality that this level of equality is squelching our delicate freedoms? Has it been leading us down the path of socialism? Is the collectivist creed destroying our democracy? If so, where did we go wrong? What turned us down the path of servitude? Perhaps we find our answer at the beginning of this article. I commenced by stating that no amount of equality will be enough for man. Later in our study of the three levels of equality we saw that our passion for equality will increase infinitely until we have destroyed our freedoms. The solution is as simple as instilling knowledge to the child who wants an equal piece of brownie. Virtues and ethics are learned; character is built; patience, kindness and charity are impressed upon the young heart. People without the knowledge of what Thomas Jefferson truly meant about equality have interpreted it to mean equality of outcome. Lack of knowledge is perhaps the main cause for our economic catastrophe today. Tocqueville suggests that we seek our education from the classics, “All who have ambitions to literary excellence in democratic nations should ever refresh themselves at classical springs; that is the most wholesome medicine for the mind. Not that I hold the classics beyond criticism, but I think that they have special merits well calculated to counterbalance our peculiar defects. They provide a prop just where we are most likely to fall.” It may be easier to be trained for a career at the local university, but it is essential for our freedoms that we be immersed in a lifelong education in the liberal arts.
Above, I mentioned the possibility of Statesmen leading us out of the quagmire of the welfare state. Statesmen build their character upon the high moral virtues found in the ancient and modern classics. Some are formally educated in the universities and some are self-educated from the mentor/authors of the classics, but both learn to understand human nature and the history of cause and effect. They are empowered with the knowledge that restores and maintains freedoms. It is essential that we relearn our true history and understand human nature or continue on the path of servitude and ignorance. Whether we have the statesmen to lead us out of our predicament or not depends upon the reader. What is more important to you—Liberty or equality?
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Unconditional Love has Converting Power
A talk given recently:
Some time ago I was in the Missionary Training Center preparing to serve God’s children in Argentina. I was thrilled for the opportunity to serve in the same country as my father had done before me. He had loved his mission and the people and the faith building experiences. I grew to love Argentina because of my father. But in the MTC I was surprised that we were being taught to pray with all the energy of our souls to love the people. “Why?” I asked, “wouldn’t that just come naturally?” Don’t I already love them because my father loved them? The next words from my MTC teacher would be repeated in my mind frequently for the next 21 years. He told us that we would need the Lord’s kind of love for these people. They would be of a different culture with different traditions and values than what I had been raised with. I would be teaching them truths that were hard to bare for many of them, but they would listen because they could feel God’s love emanating from me building trust in Him, the Savior, and many of them would want to make the commitments of membership. That day I learned a powerful truth that people will come unto Him more readily if we truly love them with this pure love of Christ, this unconditional love.
Jesus told his disciples opposite of what the world believed was love. He said in Matthew 5:43-44, “Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
“But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” Christ’s love is not the same as the world’s love. It may seem much easier to love those who are nice, those who behave well, who are respected, and powerful, and influential. And we should love them, but that is only part of the equation—the easy part. The better part is to love those who do not seem to deserve it. King Benjamin knew that we would be tempted to not practice true unconditional love towards others and he warned us that “The natural man is an enemy to God,” he explained, “and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father. . (Mosiah 3:19)
I found in my mission as well as when I became a wife and a mother that unconditional love was a powerful tool in healing hearts and bringing others to Christ.
A marriage that is built on a foundation of unconditional love in the covenant and oath of the Priesthood has the power to overcome the difficulties of this temporal world. Parents who teach and discipline with unconditional love see through the difficulties of childhood and young adulthood and recognize in their children all the gifts and talents the Lord has given them. Parenting becomes more joyful and more meaningful. Individuals who see their neighbors through the glasses of unconditional love will not be offended or angry and will be given the opportunity to lift another rather than condemn.
The disciples of the New Testament together with those of this continent in the Book of Mormon knew the converting power of unconditional love, thus they preached that it was the most desirable gift to possess and encouraged all to pray for it. Paul told us we are nothing if we do not have it. Nephi conversed with the angel who taught him about the tree of life and learned that unconditional love was “the most desirable above all things.” (1 Ne. 11:22) One of the last messages in the Book of Mormon is a discourse from Moroni who pleads with those in the latter days, “But charity is the pure love of Christ, and it endureth forever; and whoso is found possessed of it at the last day, it shall be well with him. Wherefore, my beloved brethren, pray unto the Father with all the energy of heart, that ye may be filled with this love, which he hath bestowed upon all who are true followers of his Son, Jesus Christ; that ye may become the sons of God.” (Moro. 7:47–48)
Over two decades have passed since I learned the converting power of unconditional love. It has not been a lesson that has changed me overnight, nor will it, but it has been a journey of learning, stretching and growing. It has been a journey of joy.
I would like to share an experience with you about growth through finding unconditional love for an enemy. Some years ago my mother brought into her home a person who had lost her way. She had joined the church as a young adult, had gone on a mission and had become engaged to a nice active member. When things did not work out as intended, she became sad and lost her way. She turned to the vices that she had known before joining the church and was in this state when my mother took her in. Over the years, I have listened more to the adversary than to the Spirit and began letting judgments on her character build inside me. At times I would repent, but not fully. Had I practiced unconditional love I would have seen who she really was as a child of God. It wasn’t until last summer when President Sagers asked us to clear up any poor relationships in order to be prepared to go to the Twin Falls Temple. Through fasting and prayer I prayed diligently and with all the energy of my heart to have that pure love of Christ. Gradually it came and it seemed that my whole being was transforming, that each cell was rebuilding on this new realm of love. I felt a charity for her that I had never felt before and it continues today and she has responded to me more kindly. I testify that this love converts individuals to Christ; both the giver and the receiver.
This Christmas season will be more meaningful to you and to me as we plead to Heavenly Father for this love; the pure love of Christ. As you do He will bless you with gradual amounts of love and you will feel the power come over you to love even your most troublesome enemy and you will feel your capacity to love grow boundless.
Jesus Christ is the author of love. He lives and loves each of us with unconditional love. It was that love that gave him the omnipotent power to atone for our sins. This is His Church. We are his children. In the name of Jesus Christ. Amen
Some time ago I was in the Missionary Training Center preparing to serve God’s children in Argentina. I was thrilled for the opportunity to serve in the same country as my father had done before me. He had loved his mission and the people and the faith building experiences. I grew to love Argentina because of my father. But in the MTC I was surprised that we were being taught to pray with all the energy of our souls to love the people. “Why?” I asked, “wouldn’t that just come naturally?” Don’t I already love them because my father loved them? The next words from my MTC teacher would be repeated in my mind frequently for the next 21 years. He told us that we would need the Lord’s kind of love for these people. They would be of a different culture with different traditions and values than what I had been raised with. I would be teaching them truths that were hard to bare for many of them, but they would listen because they could feel God’s love emanating from me building trust in Him, the Savior, and many of them would want to make the commitments of membership. That day I learned a powerful truth that people will come unto Him more readily if we truly love them with this pure love of Christ, this unconditional love.
Jesus told his disciples opposite of what the world believed was love. He said in Matthew 5:43-44, “Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
“But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” Christ’s love is not the same as the world’s love. It may seem much easier to love those who are nice, those who behave well, who are respected, and powerful, and influential. And we should love them, but that is only part of the equation—the easy part. The better part is to love those who do not seem to deserve it. King Benjamin knew that we would be tempted to not practice true unconditional love towards others and he warned us that “The natural man is an enemy to God,” he explained, “and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father. . (Mosiah 3:19)
I found in my mission as well as when I became a wife and a mother that unconditional love was a powerful tool in healing hearts and bringing others to Christ.
A marriage that is built on a foundation of unconditional love in the covenant and oath of the Priesthood has the power to overcome the difficulties of this temporal world. Parents who teach and discipline with unconditional love see through the difficulties of childhood and young adulthood and recognize in their children all the gifts and talents the Lord has given them. Parenting becomes more joyful and more meaningful. Individuals who see their neighbors through the glasses of unconditional love will not be offended or angry and will be given the opportunity to lift another rather than condemn.
The disciples of the New Testament together with those of this continent in the Book of Mormon knew the converting power of unconditional love, thus they preached that it was the most desirable gift to possess and encouraged all to pray for it. Paul told us we are nothing if we do not have it. Nephi conversed with the angel who taught him about the tree of life and learned that unconditional love was “the most desirable above all things.” (1 Ne. 11:22) One of the last messages in the Book of Mormon is a discourse from Moroni who pleads with those in the latter days, “But charity is the pure love of Christ, and it endureth forever; and whoso is found possessed of it at the last day, it shall be well with him. Wherefore, my beloved brethren, pray unto the Father with all the energy of heart, that ye may be filled with this love, which he hath bestowed upon all who are true followers of his Son, Jesus Christ; that ye may become the sons of God.” (Moro. 7:47–48)
Over two decades have passed since I learned the converting power of unconditional love. It has not been a lesson that has changed me overnight, nor will it, but it has been a journey of learning, stretching and growing. It has been a journey of joy.
I would like to share an experience with you about growth through finding unconditional love for an enemy. Some years ago my mother brought into her home a person who had lost her way. She had joined the church as a young adult, had gone on a mission and had become engaged to a nice active member. When things did not work out as intended, she became sad and lost her way. She turned to the vices that she had known before joining the church and was in this state when my mother took her in. Over the years, I have listened more to the adversary than to the Spirit and began letting judgments on her character build inside me. At times I would repent, but not fully. Had I practiced unconditional love I would have seen who she really was as a child of God. It wasn’t until last summer when President Sagers asked us to clear up any poor relationships in order to be prepared to go to the Twin Falls Temple. Through fasting and prayer I prayed diligently and with all the energy of my heart to have that pure love of Christ. Gradually it came and it seemed that my whole being was transforming, that each cell was rebuilding on this new realm of love. I felt a charity for her that I had never felt before and it continues today and she has responded to me more kindly. I testify that this love converts individuals to Christ; both the giver and the receiver.
This Christmas season will be more meaningful to you and to me as we plead to Heavenly Father for this love; the pure love of Christ. As you do He will bless you with gradual amounts of love and you will feel the power come over you to love even your most troublesome enemy and you will feel your capacity to love grow boundless.
Jesus Christ is the author of love. He lives and loves each of us with unconditional love. It was that love that gave him the omnipotent power to atone for our sins. This is His Church. We are his children. In the name of Jesus Christ. Amen
The Importance of a Liberal Arts Education
A response to Hayek's, The Road to Serfdom:
The pilgrims, wishing to worship how they pleased, commenced the beginning of a free society in the newly discovered North America. Over the span of almost two centuries a very large body of people came to believe in a set of principles for politics, economics and education. A corpus of fundamental principles was written in an unprecedented constitution. Over the decades since the founding, our nation became the world’s power center in science, medicine and technology; it lead in politics and education; the free market produced advances in trade and industry. Why was America such a great success? Among many things, the people believed in a certain order of values that guided them in their families and communities, in their vocation, and in their politics. They were educated in the liberal arts that gave them a broad base of knowledge in human nature, politics and literature. F. A. Hayek explains in his book, The Road to Serfdom, how a great nation could unknowingly make choices that would lead them in the opposite direction of the liberty and great bounty we have enjoyed.
Socialism comes in many forms, he writes, but the end is always the same: totalitarianism. Good people lead and thinking that they are doing good things, they plan for ways to help the poor and the suffering by providing programs. What are the outcomes? Never what was expected, in fact, the good leaders would be opposed if they knew the end product beforehand. Virtues lost in a socialist environment include independence, self-reliance, initiative, and responsibility. Fascism, and Communism become the ultimate ends of any socialist state. I wish to influence the reader in understanding that it has been a lack of education that has prompted us down the road to socialism.
The more education received and the more intelligent the individual, the more varied are his interests. He will be less likely to follow the crowd or to agree on a single order of uniform values dictated by a government. If we want to find “a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and ‘common’ instincts and tastes prevail.” This set of values, the lower and baser, is what will lead a nation. Hayek doesn’t mean “that the majority of people have low moral standards; [he] merely means that the largest group of people whose values are very similar are the people with low standards. It is, as it were,” he concludes, “the lowest common denominator, which unites the largest number of people.”
In the above situation, who leads? It is the potential dictator who can project these low moral standards and recruit more of the masses to support them. Hayek suggests that “it will be those who form the ‘mass’ in the derogatory sense of the term, the least original and independent, who will be able to put the weight of their numbers behind [the dictator’s] particular ideals.” Hayek describes how this dictator will surround himself with people and groups of people who can devise propaganda and programs to push their value system. The followers in this situation are “the docile and gullible,” writes Hayek, “who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus swell the ranks of the totalitarian party.”
How can you, dear reader, and I help to combat the low, base, primitive ideals that would eventually destroy freedom? It will have to begin with our own education. There will be others who will be frontrunners in reforming education to include broad liberal arts in addition to social education. What is the difference between the two, you ask? An education in the liberal arts is expanding breadth and depth of general knowledge as a foundation to build upon. It includes reading, writing, discussing and debating the Great Conversation as is found in the classics, ancient and modern. A social education is a technical or professional training for a preferred vocation. Both are necessary, but only one can maintain freedom—an education in the liberal arts. When I say liberal I do not mean the modern sense of liberal as in the progressive movement, but in the root meaning of the word liber, which means, “free.”
Many scholars including Hayek advocate a broad education as essential for resisting propaganda and remaining free. “Even the most intelligent and independent people,” says Hayek, “cannot entirely escape that influence [of political propaganda] if they are long isolated from all other sources of information.” The choice to change our educational system from one of liberal arts to a social education and training has been one of those choices that has isolated us from the liberating principles of freedom and may surely lead us down the road to serfdom. There is still time and there are still classics sitting on the shelves of our libraries waiting for us to pick up and read, allowing us to join the Great Conversation. It is a choice that will lead us to freedom one individual at a time.
The pilgrims, wishing to worship how they pleased, commenced the beginning of a free society in the newly discovered North America. Over the span of almost two centuries a very large body of people came to believe in a set of principles for politics, economics and education. A corpus of fundamental principles was written in an unprecedented constitution. Over the decades since the founding, our nation became the world’s power center in science, medicine and technology; it lead in politics and education; the free market produced advances in trade and industry. Why was America such a great success? Among many things, the people believed in a certain order of values that guided them in their families and communities, in their vocation, and in their politics. They were educated in the liberal arts that gave them a broad base of knowledge in human nature, politics and literature. F. A. Hayek explains in his book, The Road to Serfdom, how a great nation could unknowingly make choices that would lead them in the opposite direction of the liberty and great bounty we have enjoyed.
Socialism comes in many forms, he writes, but the end is always the same: totalitarianism. Good people lead and thinking that they are doing good things, they plan for ways to help the poor and the suffering by providing programs. What are the outcomes? Never what was expected, in fact, the good leaders would be opposed if they knew the end product beforehand. Virtues lost in a socialist environment include independence, self-reliance, initiative, and responsibility. Fascism, and Communism become the ultimate ends of any socialist state. I wish to influence the reader in understanding that it has been a lack of education that has prompted us down the road to socialism.
The more education received and the more intelligent the individual, the more varied are his interests. He will be less likely to follow the crowd or to agree on a single order of uniform values dictated by a government. If we want to find “a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and ‘common’ instincts and tastes prevail.” This set of values, the lower and baser, is what will lead a nation. Hayek doesn’t mean “that the majority of people have low moral standards; [he] merely means that the largest group of people whose values are very similar are the people with low standards. It is, as it were,” he concludes, “the lowest common denominator, which unites the largest number of people.”
In the above situation, who leads? It is the potential dictator who can project these low moral standards and recruit more of the masses to support them. Hayek suggests that “it will be those who form the ‘mass’ in the derogatory sense of the term, the least original and independent, who will be able to put the weight of their numbers behind [the dictator’s] particular ideals.” Hayek describes how this dictator will surround himself with people and groups of people who can devise propaganda and programs to push their value system. The followers in this situation are “the docile and gullible,” writes Hayek, “who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus swell the ranks of the totalitarian party.”
How can you, dear reader, and I help to combat the low, base, primitive ideals that would eventually destroy freedom? It will have to begin with our own education. There will be others who will be frontrunners in reforming education to include broad liberal arts in addition to social education. What is the difference between the two, you ask? An education in the liberal arts is expanding breadth and depth of general knowledge as a foundation to build upon. It includes reading, writing, discussing and debating the Great Conversation as is found in the classics, ancient and modern. A social education is a technical or professional training for a preferred vocation. Both are necessary, but only one can maintain freedom—an education in the liberal arts. When I say liberal I do not mean the modern sense of liberal as in the progressive movement, but in the root meaning of the word liber, which means, “free.”
Many scholars including Hayek advocate a broad education as essential for resisting propaganda and remaining free. “Even the most intelligent and independent people,” says Hayek, “cannot entirely escape that influence [of political propaganda] if they are long isolated from all other sources of information.” The choice to change our educational system from one of liberal arts to a social education and training has been one of those choices that has isolated us from the liberating principles of freedom and may surely lead us down the road to serfdom. There is still time and there are still classics sitting on the shelves of our libraries waiting for us to pick up and read, allowing us to join the Great Conversation. It is a choice that will lead us to freedom one individual at a time.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
History Teaches...
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
--C.S. Lewis
--C.S. Lewis
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
What is Truth?
Good things come to those who discuss:
While arguing Rothbard’s ideas with Dave we chose to be offended for our own reasons. He and I were not agreeing about the Free Market bringing abundance to all participants as stated by Rothbard and Bastiat. He believed that the impoverished soul who chooses not to work is more abundantly taken care of in a welfare state and I believed that in any level of a free market economy that all participants are blessed with more abundance each at their level of wealth, continually progressing further towards more abundance. It is okay to disagree, but we were angry about it and one of us wanted to stop the discussion—Period, the end!
I explained to him that I am not arguing for the sake of being right and “showing off”, but was truly wanting to practice verbalizing in the Socratic method. Learning comes better for me if I can discuss, explain, question and listen. I was frustrated that the dialog would come to an end for that very reason. I began doing what women do best—analyze. Why do we angrily argue about ideas? What is it that offends us? How can we get to the bottom of this if we cannot discuss? What is the “bottom of this” I asked myself? The bottom of this is truth. Whose truth? God’s truth. If it is God’s truth, why are we arguing? Isn’t His truth always constant and unchanging and unquestionably the way it is? Aha, an epiphany arose in my mind that might be the cause of the arduous argument. Are we arguing because we wish to have ownership in the truth we are seeking? Do we want to be the possessor of the truth that ensures that we are “right”? “Was that the cause?”, we discussed together. A sudden relief swept over me as I realized that yes we were “hoarding” the truth for the sake of being the “right” one. There is power in that you know. But, obviously not a power of happiness or peace.
The thought came to me that this idea is huge. Is there anything more huge? Absolutely not. Everything that comes from God is truth. All humankind are in search of it in their own way, but when we hoard it by arguing over it we are in essence taking possession of what is already His. He gives truth to us. All that we seek for is ours, not to hoard, but to share. The essence of why we must learn, discuss and ponder is to search for His truth.
While arguing Rothbard’s ideas with Dave we chose to be offended for our own reasons. He and I were not agreeing about the Free Market bringing abundance to all participants as stated by Rothbard and Bastiat. He believed that the impoverished soul who chooses not to work is more abundantly taken care of in a welfare state and I believed that in any level of a free market economy that all participants are blessed with more abundance each at their level of wealth, continually progressing further towards more abundance. It is okay to disagree, but we were angry about it and one of us wanted to stop the discussion—Period, the end!
I explained to him that I am not arguing for the sake of being right and “showing off”, but was truly wanting to practice verbalizing in the Socratic method. Learning comes better for me if I can discuss, explain, question and listen. I was frustrated that the dialog would come to an end for that very reason. I began doing what women do best—analyze. Why do we angrily argue about ideas? What is it that offends us? How can we get to the bottom of this if we cannot discuss? What is the “bottom of this” I asked myself? The bottom of this is truth. Whose truth? God’s truth. If it is God’s truth, why are we arguing? Isn’t His truth always constant and unchanging and unquestionably the way it is? Aha, an epiphany arose in my mind that might be the cause of the arduous argument. Are we arguing because we wish to have ownership in the truth we are seeking? Do we want to be the possessor of the truth that ensures that we are “right”? “Was that the cause?”, we discussed together. A sudden relief swept over me as I realized that yes we were “hoarding” the truth for the sake of being the “right” one. There is power in that you know. But, obviously not a power of happiness or peace.
The thought came to me that this idea is huge. Is there anything more huge? Absolutely not. Everything that comes from God is truth. All humankind are in search of it in their own way, but when we hoard it by arguing over it we are in essence taking possession of what is already His. He gives truth to us. All that we seek for is ours, not to hoard, but to share. The essence of why we must learn, discuss and ponder is to search for His truth.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Center for Social Leadership Youth
My son, Andrew, and his friends at Williamsburg Academy have put together an inspiring and educational site for youth. On the front page they say, "At CSLYouth we are preparing ourselves so that we can provide the solutions to the coming style of life and leadership. Our mission is to become better connected with youth across the Nation and World, and preparing them for tomorrow by using the technology of today."
Who are the authors of the site and what do they believe?
We are students, youth, and leaders. We come from different backgrounds, races, religions, ethnicities, and places.
We part ways with the stereotypical teenager, who is commonly viewed as lazy, overly dramatic, ignorant, incompetent and egotistical.
At CSL Youth, we are young men and women who are educating ourselves for leadership, who value virtue, wisdom, diplomacy, and courage. It is clear to us that humanity is experiencing dramatic changes. The type of leadership in our parents’ world is broken. Instead of letting big business and big government have all the power, our generation is breaking that power up so each individual can make their own unique contributions. As we unite, we are making a new power system which is more service-oriented, where we can choose to serve instead of being forced by government. And can we just say, technology rocks! Our mission is to prepare ourselves to be the leaders who make sure this new power system--which is coming--values faith, family and freedom. At CSL Youth, we dedicate ourselves to improving our own lives and society regardless of our social standing, wealth, privilege and especially age. We are young, but we can create beauty, lift our vision of mankind, educate ourselves and each other, and deepen our life experience. We can prepare for leadership. We will lead in all parts of society, including business, government, education, media, religion, family and community to protect our freedom and the freedom of our children. Our parents’ generation has left us with a huge national debt, landfills full of Coke bottles we didn't drink from, and a broken educational system that pretty much stinks. Society is suffering. Institutions are crumbling. We have lost our faith in government and corporations. Yesterday’s leadership is lacking, even broken. And it is up to us to step up and act. We are preparing ourselves so that we can provide the solutions. Have you asked yourself, What is the highest and best use of my talents and passions? What can I do that will have the most positive impact on society? How will the world be better because of my life and contribution? What was I born to do ? At CSL Youth, we believe that we can make a difference. WE can inspire each other. WE can help each other. WE can teach each other. WE can do it. Who are we? We are… Students. Youth. Leaders. Will you join us?
Who are the authors of the site and what do they believe?
We are students, youth, and leaders. We come from different backgrounds, races, religions, ethnicities, and places.
We part ways with the stereotypical teenager, who is commonly viewed as lazy, overly dramatic, ignorant, incompetent and egotistical.
At CSL Youth, we are young men and women who are educating ourselves for leadership, who value virtue, wisdom, diplomacy, and courage. It is clear to us that humanity is experiencing dramatic changes. The type of leadership in our parents’ world is broken. Instead of letting big business and big government have all the power, our generation is breaking that power up so each individual can make their own unique contributions. As we unite, we are making a new power system which is more service-oriented, where we can choose to serve instead of being forced by government. And can we just say, technology rocks! Our mission is to prepare ourselves to be the leaders who make sure this new power system--which is coming--values faith, family and freedom. At CSL Youth, we dedicate ourselves to improving our own lives and society regardless of our social standing, wealth, privilege and especially age. We are young, but we can create beauty, lift our vision of mankind, educate ourselves and each other, and deepen our life experience. We can prepare for leadership. We will lead in all parts of society, including business, government, education, media, religion, family and community to protect our freedom and the freedom of our children. Our parents’ generation has left us with a huge national debt, landfills full of Coke bottles we didn't drink from, and a broken educational system that pretty much stinks. Society is suffering. Institutions are crumbling. We have lost our faith in government and corporations. Yesterday’s leadership is lacking, even broken. And it is up to us to step up and act. We are preparing ourselves so that we can provide the solutions. Have you asked yourself, What is the highest and best use of my talents and passions? What can I do that will have the most positive impact on society? How will the world be better because of my life and contribution? What was I born to do ? At CSL Youth, we believe that we can make a difference. WE can inspire each other. WE can help each other. WE can teach each other. WE can do it. Who are we? We are… Students. Youth. Leaders. Will you join us?
Free To Choose, Milton and Rose Friedman
My Summary and Response to the Book:
In their book, Free To Choose, Milton and Rose Friedman write to the common person why a moderate free market system is the best mode of government. They tout that a free market with limited government regulation far surpasses the rate of financial progress for all classes, verses a stagnant socialist system that destroys incentive and growth. Societies that do not permit the free market have huge gaps between the rich and the poor. The socialists believe that the fault lies in the man and not in the system so they continually make the system bigger and more comprehensive to fix the “faulty man”. A free market grows wealth by allowing the individual to do what he does best in his own way within the law. The difference is that with socialism, massive amounts of energy and spending is focused on coercive measures of conformity whereas in the free market most of the energy is focused on innovation and production.
They recommend that the government be limited and that power should never be used to provide benefits. They harmonize with the words of John Stuart Mill, “The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.” Welfare programs are coercive. “New Deal” programs have proven to be very inefficient. Resolving to teach solutions to the ordinary person, the Friedman’s give solutions for reducing and eventually phasing out Social Security and other “cradle to grave” programs. They advise putting education back into the parents’ hands where it belongs.
Three equalities are explored—equality before God, equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. During the United States’ Founding period it was the equality before God that was sought. Shortly after the Civil War greater opportunity for all men provided a new equality never before enjoyed by all men of all races—it was the equality of opportunity. Both equalities did not limit freedoms, but expanded them. Since the early decades of the last century a new kind of equality has emerged that is destroying our freedoms—it is the equality of outcome. “Everyone should have the same level of living or of income,” write the authors, “[and] should finish the race at the same time. As the Dodo said in Alice and Wonderland, ‘everybody has won, and all must have prizes.’” The goal is fairness, a very vague notion. In the end the talented lose the incentive to achieve and the mediocre are rewarded—all are in a decadent decline towards destruction. Under this false notion of fairness the government must grow stronger and more comprehensive to make things more and more “fair” as the rapacious special interest groups grovel for more.
In their book, Free To Choose, Milton and Rose Friedman write to the common person why a moderate free market system is the best mode of government. They tout that a free market with limited government regulation far surpasses the rate of financial progress for all classes, verses a stagnant socialist system that destroys incentive and growth. Societies that do not permit the free market have huge gaps between the rich and the poor. The socialists believe that the fault lies in the man and not in the system so they continually make the system bigger and more comprehensive to fix the “faulty man”. A free market grows wealth by allowing the individual to do what he does best in his own way within the law. The difference is that with socialism, massive amounts of energy and spending is focused on coercive measures of conformity whereas in the free market most of the energy is focused on innovation and production.
They recommend that the government be limited and that power should never be used to provide benefits. They harmonize with the words of John Stuart Mill, “The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.” Welfare programs are coercive. “New Deal” programs have proven to be very inefficient. Resolving to teach solutions to the ordinary person, the Friedman’s give solutions for reducing and eventually phasing out Social Security and other “cradle to grave” programs. They advise putting education back into the parents’ hands where it belongs.
Three equalities are explored—equality before God, equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. During the United States’ Founding period it was the equality before God that was sought. Shortly after the Civil War greater opportunity for all men provided a new equality never before enjoyed by all men of all races—it was the equality of opportunity. Both equalities did not limit freedoms, but expanded them. Since the early decades of the last century a new kind of equality has emerged that is destroying our freedoms—it is the equality of outcome. “Everyone should have the same level of living or of income,” write the authors, “[and] should finish the race at the same time. As the Dodo said in Alice and Wonderland, ‘everybody has won, and all must have prizes.’” The goal is fairness, a very vague notion. In the end the talented lose the incentive to achieve and the mediocre are rewarded—all are in a decadent decline towards destruction. Under this false notion of fairness the government must grow stronger and more comprehensive to make things more and more “fair” as the rapacious special interest groups grovel for more.
My Response to Approaching Zion, Hugh Nibley
What is the use of studying economics through the scholars of Adam Smith, Frederic Bastiat and F. A. Hayek when the Lord says the opposite? I just spent several weeks pouring over Wealth of Nations, Economic Harmonies and The Road to Serfdom mingled with selected works of Karl Marx and theories of John Maynard Keynes. What did it teach me? I learned that the free market works and that regulated economies lead to totalitarianism; that faith in the “invisible hand” leads to individual wealth as well as national wealth and that following one’s self-interest leads to a more abundant and wealthy people. Before reading Hugh Nibley’s Approaching Zion, I was convinced that the free-market is the ultimate way and that anything else means destruction to liberty. Confused am I now as I contemplate the Lord’s economy taught in Nibley’s book, which dictates that we must be completely equal with no poor among us. As much as I hated Marx’s philosophy I was tormented to think that the Lord wants us to live similar to Marx’s utopia. It could not be so. Relieved, I realized that Marx’s utopia is obtained by force in an immoral world called communism. Zion, the other utopia, is achieved by individual choice in a pure and moral world. The difference is morality and virtue as opposed to immoral behavior and vice.
Excuses and justifications for immoral actions are the desire of today. Darwinism and Marxism fulfill those desires and become the justification for much of our societal living. It is the lack of spiritual teachings that promote the moral decay leading to an environment where communism can be possible. With such a dark prospect, it is no wonder why many still fight for a free market economy—an economy that allows free choice and prosperity. But on a higher level, God wishes us to not be concerned with money and becoming wealthy—He commands that we be completely obedient and full of compassion to the point that there is “no poor among us.” He teaches us His economy and the proper way to work in His kingdom, which is to study the scriptures, preach the Gospel, and work the land. There is no “self-interest” in the way that Adam Smith teaches, but only the interest in God’s kingdom and the focused preparation that must take place for Zion to prosper.
So my question in the beginning was why study Smith, Bastiat and Hayek when God’s economy is so different? I can only guess that before we can begin living, as God desires we must take strides apart from the slavery-loving Marxists and the compulsory planned economies of Keynes. The free-market is only a step in the right direction. The next step must be a liberal education. And in our education will we studying the subject of how to earn a living and get rich or will we study those revered subjects that will make us better men? All the while a spiritual education must be pursued according to ancient scripture and modern revelation in order to understand and prepare us for God’s economy.
Excuses and justifications for immoral actions are the desire of today. Darwinism and Marxism fulfill those desires and become the justification for much of our societal living. It is the lack of spiritual teachings that promote the moral decay leading to an environment where communism can be possible. With such a dark prospect, it is no wonder why many still fight for a free market economy—an economy that allows free choice and prosperity. But on a higher level, God wishes us to not be concerned with money and becoming wealthy—He commands that we be completely obedient and full of compassion to the point that there is “no poor among us.” He teaches us His economy and the proper way to work in His kingdom, which is to study the scriptures, preach the Gospel, and work the land. There is no “self-interest” in the way that Adam Smith teaches, but only the interest in God’s kingdom and the focused preparation that must take place for Zion to prosper.
So my question in the beginning was why study Smith, Bastiat and Hayek when God’s economy is so different? I can only guess that before we can begin living, as God desires we must take strides apart from the slavery-loving Marxists and the compulsory planned economies of Keynes. The free-market is only a step in the right direction. The next step must be a liberal education. And in our education will we studying the subject of how to earn a living and get rich or will we study those revered subjects that will make us better men? All the while a spiritual education must be pursued according to ancient scripture and modern revelation in order to understand and prepare us for God’s economy.
My Summary of Approaching Zion by Hugh Nibley
Hugh Nibley sums up the ultimate utopia in his book, Approaching Zion, as explained by ancient Israel, ancient American Book of Mormon prophets and early prophets of the Latter-Day dispensation. If one has read any of the writings of Karl Marx he may find that the two works seem to be similar. They both tout equality with no rich and no poor among them. The difference, however, is significant and immensely opposite. Marx’s utopia is obtained by force in an immoral world called communism. Zion, the other utopia, is achieved by individual choice in a pure and moral world. Shedding light on Zion, the prophet Brigham Young elucidates that it will never be achieved until “this inequality shall cease on the earth.” How is equality attained? Nibley describes the process in a series of lectures that comprise Approaching Zion. The people must prepare to receive Zion by obedience to and by becoming pure unto God. The mental attitude should be the belief that everything comes from God; that we do not earn anything from God and that because all comes from Him, everyone has a right to what he needs to sustain him, even that of the stranger who harvests a needed apple off another’s tree to maintain his life as he walks on his merry way.
Nibley writes of the zealous, but uneducated individuals who strive in vain to prepare for Zion. “Zeal,” he writes, “makes us loyal and unflinching, but God wants more than that.” He wants us to obtain knowledge and learn to do our own thinking in addition to having zeal. With many essential truths having been removed from its classrooms, the modern education of today is an education without spirituality and does not educate the whole man. Being humble and teachable is the key to receive the required knowledge that creates the whole man who is prepared to receive Zion. Writes Nibley, “True knowledge never shuts the door on more knowledge, but zeal often does.” He cautions us to become liberally educated equal to our zeal.
There is no middle ground when it comes to preparing for Zion. The masses want to have both the blessings from heaven and the excitement of the world. Zion can only be built on true religion, which is obedience to every principle and doctrine. It is a separation of worldly dogma. Nibley reiterates the truth in Matthew 6:19-20, “You cannot lay up treasures both on earth and in heaven—you cannot divide your heart between them; for to one master or the other you must give your whole and undivided devotion.” Devotion to God reduces corruption. Educating our families away from the middle ground to the saving principles of Zion is paramount to begin the preparation for the Lord to bring Zion to earth. Nibley exclaims that we must preach it, live it, study it and discuss Zion in our families so that they will know how to bring it to the earth!
Nibley writes of the zealous, but uneducated individuals who strive in vain to prepare for Zion. “Zeal,” he writes, “makes us loyal and unflinching, but God wants more than that.” He wants us to obtain knowledge and learn to do our own thinking in addition to having zeal. With many essential truths having been removed from its classrooms, the modern education of today is an education without spirituality and does not educate the whole man. Being humble and teachable is the key to receive the required knowledge that creates the whole man who is prepared to receive Zion. Writes Nibley, “True knowledge never shuts the door on more knowledge, but zeal often does.” He cautions us to become liberally educated equal to our zeal.
There is no middle ground when it comes to preparing for Zion. The masses want to have both the blessings from heaven and the excitement of the world. Zion can only be built on true religion, which is obedience to every principle and doctrine. It is a separation of worldly dogma. Nibley reiterates the truth in Matthew 6:19-20, “You cannot lay up treasures both on earth and in heaven—you cannot divide your heart between them; for to one master or the other you must give your whole and undivided devotion.” Devotion to God reduces corruption. Educating our families away from the middle ground to the saving principles of Zion is paramount to begin the preparation for the Lord to bring Zion to earth. Nibley exclaims that we must preach it, live it, study it and discuss Zion in our families so that they will know how to bring it to the earth!
F. A. Hayek's Road To Serfdom—A Summary
In his book, The Road to Serfdom, Friedrich A. Hayek, touts classical liberalism and free market economics as the best way to build a happy wealthy nation. He recounts the history leading up to Nazi Germany through the rise of socialism. He demonstrates that democratic planning requires propaganda and coercion and is best implemented in an ignorant society. Hayek sought to find the true commonalities in the many sides of socialism. Fascism and communism are similar in that the end of either become totalitarian systems, but they differ when they exist in a capitalist system—one being a conservative party and the other a modern liberal party. Either way they both share the path of constant expansion of a centralized government. Hayek warns us in his book that unless we change our present course of collectivism we will be headed down the road to serfdom.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
My Response to Economic Harmonies by Frederic Bastiat
Ramblings...
Bastiat’s Economic Harmonies has been a breath of fresh air for one who just finished reading the works of Karl Marx. The harsh society of socialism abolishes private property, family relations, classical education and religion. The socialists argue that capital causes a division of labor, which creates social classes, which creates hostility between the classes. They say that such a social order includes exploitation, evil choices and human suffering. To that I agree; and yet, I say, that is part of the natural path of free trade. With all good things there is opposition because men have agency. Agency is a natural order that brings choice and accountability. “Society is composed of men,” writes Bastiat, “and every man is a free agent. Since man is free, he can choose; since he can choose, he can err; since he can err, he can suffer.” There is growth through suffering and when institutions attempt to remove that error and suffering, they must remove agency and ultimately freedom. “If man-made institutions intervene in these matters to nullify divine law, evil nonetheless follows upon error, but it falls upon the wrong person. It strikes him whom it should not strike; it no longer serves as a warning or a lesson; it is no longer self-limiting; it is no longer destroyed by its own action; it persists, it grows worse.” So I echo Bastiat and proclaim, “bring on free trade and liberty!” Let the people choose for themselves.
The Socialist’s negative view of capitalism and competition is contested that evil choices made by men eventually correct themselves in time. Bastiat wrote, “Man’s principal social tendencies are harmonious in that, as every error leads to disillusionment and every vice to punishment, the discords tend constantly to disappear.” Bastiat did not try to cover up the fact that in a free society there would be errors. Competition does not remove hardship and suffering. The importance of struggle and effort, pain and suffering was essential for man’s progress. “On every rung of the ladder of progress,” says Bastiat, “a certain degree of suffering is and always will be man’s lot. But it teaches us also that suffering has a mission, since it would be impossible to comprehend the role of desire as a goad to our faculties if it lagged behind them, instead of rushing along ahead, as it does.” Although susceptible to evil and injustice, the best way to freedom, according to Bastiat, is undeniably free trade, which includes capitalism and competition.
Seemingly unbeknownst to the socialists, competition exists in both the natural and artificial order. Bastiat warned that competition could not be destroyed. In a free society it would be manifested in a struggle to become the best and most preferred producer, however in a socialist society it would be manifest in the direct opposite. Says Bastiat, “Men would still compete, but they would compete to excel in idleness, stupidity and improvidence.”
Whether we choose the natural social order or the artificial order there will always be competition, free exchange, evil, pain, and suffering. Bastiat enlightens the reader that there is a natural harmony that exists between the interests of man and mankind and that free trade and natural competition will be the mainspring to extend all the gifts of nature worldwide to bless humanity. In the spirit of the book of Revelations, Bastiat proclaims that “evil ends in good and hastens its coming, whereas the good can never end in evil, and therefore must eventually triumph.” Hooray for the good news projected in Economic Harmonies. I am convinced that no artificial social order can bring the happiness achieved in a free state.
Bastiat’s Economic Harmonies has been a breath of fresh air for one who just finished reading the works of Karl Marx. The harsh society of socialism abolishes private property, family relations, classical education and religion. The socialists argue that capital causes a division of labor, which creates social classes, which creates hostility between the classes. They say that such a social order includes exploitation, evil choices and human suffering. To that I agree; and yet, I say, that is part of the natural path of free trade. With all good things there is opposition because men have agency. Agency is a natural order that brings choice and accountability. “Society is composed of men,” writes Bastiat, “and every man is a free agent. Since man is free, he can choose; since he can choose, he can err; since he can err, he can suffer.” There is growth through suffering and when institutions attempt to remove that error and suffering, they must remove agency and ultimately freedom. “If man-made institutions intervene in these matters to nullify divine law, evil nonetheless follows upon error, but it falls upon the wrong person. It strikes him whom it should not strike; it no longer serves as a warning or a lesson; it is no longer self-limiting; it is no longer destroyed by its own action; it persists, it grows worse.” So I echo Bastiat and proclaim, “bring on free trade and liberty!” Let the people choose for themselves.
The Socialist’s negative view of capitalism and competition is contested that evil choices made by men eventually correct themselves in time. Bastiat wrote, “Man’s principal social tendencies are harmonious in that, as every error leads to disillusionment and every vice to punishment, the discords tend constantly to disappear.” Bastiat did not try to cover up the fact that in a free society there would be errors. Competition does not remove hardship and suffering. The importance of struggle and effort, pain and suffering was essential for man’s progress. “On every rung of the ladder of progress,” says Bastiat, “a certain degree of suffering is and always will be man’s lot. But it teaches us also that suffering has a mission, since it would be impossible to comprehend the role of desire as a goad to our faculties if it lagged behind them, instead of rushing along ahead, as it does.” Although susceptible to evil and injustice, the best way to freedom, according to Bastiat, is undeniably free trade, which includes capitalism and competition.
Seemingly unbeknownst to the socialists, competition exists in both the natural and artificial order. Bastiat warned that competition could not be destroyed. In a free society it would be manifested in a struggle to become the best and most preferred producer, however in a socialist society it would be manifest in the direct opposite. Says Bastiat, “Men would still compete, but they would compete to excel in idleness, stupidity and improvidence.”
Whether we choose the natural social order or the artificial order there will always be competition, free exchange, evil, pain, and suffering. Bastiat enlightens the reader that there is a natural harmony that exists between the interests of man and mankind and that free trade and natural competition will be the mainspring to extend all the gifts of nature worldwide to bless humanity. In the spirit of the book of Revelations, Bastiat proclaims that “evil ends in good and hastens its coming, whereas the good can never end in evil, and therefore must eventually triumph.” Hooray for the good news projected in Economic Harmonies. I am convinced that no artificial social order can bring the happiness achieved in a free state.
Bastiat's Economic Harmonies
A summary...
The French politician and economist, Frédéric Bastiat was concerned with France’s unfortunate direction towards an artificial social order called Socialism and set out to convince his countryman to adopt the notion of liberty, the natural social order. His passion for freedom gave him an interest for free trade, which subject he examined in his book, Economic Harmonies. In argument with the socialist’s scarcity mentality, he established the belief that the interests of mankind are essentially harmonious and that the more an individual produced the more he blessed those around him. The same is true for a nation: the more a nation produced the more it blessed the world.
Among many of the socialists’ views were the beliefs that as the rich became richer, the poor became more impoverished; as population increased, food would become scarce; and as private property is theft, it should be abolished with all property becoming communal. He sums up their ideas that mankind is unable to make the right choices and that liberty must be the culprit. Underestimating the good and denying the progress made by humanity, the socialist persisted in, “seeking out evils and exaggerating them beyond measure.” Reducing liberty and free choice then became the first motive as they created, “systematic obstructionism, parliamentary bickering, street insurrections, revolutions, crises, factions, wild notions, demands advanced by all men to govern under all possible forms, new systems, as dangerous as they are absurd, which teach the people to look to the government for everything.” In simple terms, people could not do anything for themselves so the government must step in to provide.
The socialists were particularly caught up with the seemingly evil notion of self-interest. They believed that it was the root of evil in a society. The capitalist’s self-interest exploits the proletarian; self-interested greed leads to monopoly; over-population leads to scarce resources were some of their complaints. Frequently misunderstood by humanity are the two social sciences, moral and political economy. The moral realm directs our moral character and includes religious sentiment, parental affection, filial devotion, love, friendship, patriotism, charity, and all godly virtues. The remaining social science runs the economy and includes the single and cold domain of self-interest. It is because of self-interest, observes Bastiat, that the man produces and acquires, but it inevitably blesses society.
Bastiat contended that exploitation, monopoly and scarce resources are problems that arise when there is a disbelief in Providence. If men are ruled by virtuous principles then their self-interest will be in harmony with nature. He urged his people to have faith in God who knows our wants and will provide. “Let us, therefore stop worrying about the fate of mankind,” wrote Bastiat, “Thousands of centuries lie ahead of it; and in any case, without asking political economists to settle problems that are out of their field, let us confidently leave the fate of future generations in the hands of Him who will call them into existence.” With the help of God, whatever his children cannot do, He makes up for it. Bastiat historically showed that, “As capital increases, the capitalists’ absolute share in the total production increases and their relative share decreases. On the other hand, the workers’ share increases both relatively and absolutely.” History has shown that in a free society, Bastiat is right.
The French politician and economist, Frédéric Bastiat was concerned with France’s unfortunate direction towards an artificial social order called Socialism and set out to convince his countryman to adopt the notion of liberty, the natural social order. His passion for freedom gave him an interest for free trade, which subject he examined in his book, Economic Harmonies. In argument with the socialist’s scarcity mentality, he established the belief that the interests of mankind are essentially harmonious and that the more an individual produced the more he blessed those around him. The same is true for a nation: the more a nation produced the more it blessed the world.
Among many of the socialists’ views were the beliefs that as the rich became richer, the poor became more impoverished; as population increased, food would become scarce; and as private property is theft, it should be abolished with all property becoming communal. He sums up their ideas that mankind is unable to make the right choices and that liberty must be the culprit. Underestimating the good and denying the progress made by humanity, the socialist persisted in, “seeking out evils and exaggerating them beyond measure.” Reducing liberty and free choice then became the first motive as they created, “systematic obstructionism, parliamentary bickering, street insurrections, revolutions, crises, factions, wild notions, demands advanced by all men to govern under all possible forms, new systems, as dangerous as they are absurd, which teach the people to look to the government for everything.” In simple terms, people could not do anything for themselves so the government must step in to provide.
The socialists were particularly caught up with the seemingly evil notion of self-interest. They believed that it was the root of evil in a society. The capitalist’s self-interest exploits the proletarian; self-interested greed leads to monopoly; over-population leads to scarce resources were some of their complaints. Frequently misunderstood by humanity are the two social sciences, moral and political economy. The moral realm directs our moral character and includes religious sentiment, parental affection, filial devotion, love, friendship, patriotism, charity, and all godly virtues. The remaining social science runs the economy and includes the single and cold domain of self-interest. It is because of self-interest, observes Bastiat, that the man produces and acquires, but it inevitably blesses society.
Bastiat contended that exploitation, monopoly and scarce resources are problems that arise when there is a disbelief in Providence. If men are ruled by virtuous principles then their self-interest will be in harmony with nature. He urged his people to have faith in God who knows our wants and will provide. “Let us, therefore stop worrying about the fate of mankind,” wrote Bastiat, “Thousands of centuries lie ahead of it; and in any case, without asking political economists to settle problems that are out of their field, let us confidently leave the fate of future generations in the hands of Him who will call them into existence.” With the help of God, whatever his children cannot do, He makes up for it. Bastiat historically showed that, “As capital increases, the capitalists’ absolute share in the total production increases and their relative share decreases. On the other hand, the workers’ share increases both relatively and absolutely.” History has shown that in a free society, Bastiat is right.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
My Response to the Works of Karl Marx
Beware Marx:
Why should one study the works of Karl Marx? The reader either loves him or hates him. Dark and abstract are his ideas of dialectic materialism and the abolishment of family, classical education, religion and private property. The reasons to pursue a careful study include the following. Reading Marx reveals the antithesis of religion, which when studied gives greater understanding of one’s own belief just as the carpenter compares two boards to find the one that is straight. His ideas cause readers to ask questions, to argue, to reach deep inside themselves to understand their own beliefs and the effects of their choices. However dark and odious are his conceptions, he has greatly influenced most of the world’s modern politics and economics.
I wish to compare Marx’s ideas with some of the fundamental principles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints. The first is the divine directive to “put off the natural man.” The spiritual man must dominate the natural man through believing in and partaking of the Atonement. It is a journey of self-mastery in line with God’s moral code as a means of Eternal Life. In direct opposition, Marx professes world happiness when the natural man dominates the spiritual man, even to the point of destroying him. “The more man puts into God,” scorns Marx, “the less he retains in himself.” It is his goal to elevate man higher than God “The criticism of religion,” Marx writes, “ends in the teaching that man is the highest being for man, it ends, that is, with the categorical imperative to overthrow all conditions in which man is a debased, forsaken, contemptible being forced into servitude.” His view depended upon the working class, the proletariats, rising up to dominate the upper classes; to be prepared to revolt against the French aristocracy.
Another comparison is the task to remove human error and suffering. Marxism endeavors to take the place of the Savior’s divine role as Redeemer by fixing all the societal problems associated with affliction and sin. First it must remove all religion. If there are no moral codes there can be no sin. “Communists preach no morality at all,” profess Marx, “They do not put to people the moral demand: Love one another, be not egoists, etc.; on the contrary, they know very well that egoism, like sacrifice, is under specific conditions a necessary form of the individual’s struggle for survival.” If there is no capitalism or division of labor there is no exploitation. If there is no family, there can be no division of labor.
Finally, the Saints of the Latter Days are admonished to study the scriptures and their heritage in order to remember the many good things the Lord has done to bless his children. Marx attacks the study of history, as it is not relevant to a communist society. He seems to think that if there is no classical education there will be no remembrance of the rich history that reminds the masses of the right paths to take or how to think and act in every condition. Today our education spends much of the time teaching multi-culturalism instead of a balance of the rich history and heritage. It’s goal leans toward teaching the embarrassing and the degrading class struggles just as Marx dictated. We need a balance of all history. Remember William Wilberforce who, because he understood the degradation of the slaves, stood up as a hero for humankind. Remember Christopher Columbus who was "wrought upon by the spirit" to discover this land for the preparation of the Restoration of the gospel? Because of his voyage, we know from the annals of history and the Book of Mormon that the descendants of Nephi were to be scattered and afflicted, but that if they would return to his fold, they would be blessed beyond measure. I fear that if we forget the stories, the heroes and the Lord’s hand in all the annals of history, we will lose the greatest heritage, that of the great founding of our country. Preparing to usher in the Restoration of the Gospel, many great and common people were led to find and found this land with good government. We can keep this if we study and learn from all facets of history, not just the facet of class struggle.
Why should one study the works of Karl Marx? The reader either loves him or hates him. Dark and abstract are his ideas of dialectic materialism and the abolishment of family, classical education, religion and private property. The reasons to pursue a careful study include the following. Reading Marx reveals the antithesis of religion, which when studied gives greater understanding of one’s own belief just as the carpenter compares two boards to find the one that is straight. His ideas cause readers to ask questions, to argue, to reach deep inside themselves to understand their own beliefs and the effects of their choices. However dark and odious are his conceptions, he has greatly influenced most of the world’s modern politics and economics.
I wish to compare Marx’s ideas with some of the fundamental principles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints. The first is the divine directive to “put off the natural man.” The spiritual man must dominate the natural man through believing in and partaking of the Atonement. It is a journey of self-mastery in line with God’s moral code as a means of Eternal Life. In direct opposition, Marx professes world happiness when the natural man dominates the spiritual man, even to the point of destroying him. “The more man puts into God,” scorns Marx, “the less he retains in himself.” It is his goal to elevate man higher than God “The criticism of religion,” Marx writes, “ends in the teaching that man is the highest being for man, it ends, that is, with the categorical imperative to overthrow all conditions in which man is a debased, forsaken, contemptible being forced into servitude.” His view depended upon the working class, the proletariats, rising up to dominate the upper classes; to be prepared to revolt against the French aristocracy.
Another comparison is the task to remove human error and suffering. Marxism endeavors to take the place of the Savior’s divine role as Redeemer by fixing all the societal problems associated with affliction and sin. First it must remove all religion. If there are no moral codes there can be no sin. “Communists preach no morality at all,” profess Marx, “They do not put to people the moral demand: Love one another, be not egoists, etc.; on the contrary, they know very well that egoism, like sacrifice, is under specific conditions a necessary form of the individual’s struggle for survival.” If there is no capitalism or division of labor there is no exploitation. If there is no family, there can be no division of labor.
Finally, the Saints of the Latter Days are admonished to study the scriptures and their heritage in order to remember the many good things the Lord has done to bless his children. Marx attacks the study of history, as it is not relevant to a communist society. He seems to think that if there is no classical education there will be no remembrance of the rich history that reminds the masses of the right paths to take or how to think and act in every condition. Today our education spends much of the time teaching multi-culturalism instead of a balance of the rich history and heritage. It’s goal leans toward teaching the embarrassing and the degrading class struggles just as Marx dictated. We need a balance of all history. Remember William Wilberforce who, because he understood the degradation of the slaves, stood up as a hero for humankind. Remember Christopher Columbus who was "wrought upon by the spirit" to discover this land for the preparation of the Restoration of the gospel? Because of his voyage, we know from the annals of history and the Book of Mormon that the descendants of Nephi were to be scattered and afflicted, but that if they would return to his fold, they would be blessed beyond measure. I fear that if we forget the stories, the heroes and the Lord’s hand in all the annals of history, we will lose the greatest heritage, that of the great founding of our country. Preparing to usher in the Restoration of the Gospel, many great and common people were led to find and found this land with good government. We can keep this if we study and learn from all facets of history, not just the facet of class struggle.
Karl Marx
A Summary of his works:
Using Hegelian philosophy, English economics and French politics, Marx sets out to create the ultimate communist society. His dialectic materialism takes the contradictions of thought, namely a thesis and antithesis and forms a “higher truth” called a synthesis, which becomes the new thesis. It is now combined with an antithesis, which again produces a synthesis, which again becomes a new thesis. The process continues until the ultimate “truth” is found. In this way, according to Marx, we will eventually attain the perfect state, free of class struggle. “It is the return of man himself as a social [being],” writes Marx.
The enemy to communism is capitalism with its division of labor and its division of the classes into property owners and property-less workers. Marx describes how the laborer is separated from the products he creates, his labor-power and from nature. He is alienated from his potential to become a universal being and master the universe. Abolishing capitalism will require that private property, religion, family and classical education are abolished and replaced by “free, conscious, creative social activity, in which man is not dominated by need, envy, or the desire to possess.” (Eugene Kamenka)
Marx predicts that the proletariat will rise up against the bourgeoisie and overthrow the state, as was the attempt during the French Revolution, but that it would not fail as in the French Revolution. He feels that no leader could liberate the proletariat, but the proletariat itself; nor could any ideology replace the theological understanding or the empirical insight of the perfect society, communism.
Using Hegelian philosophy, English economics and French politics, Marx sets out to create the ultimate communist society. His dialectic materialism takes the contradictions of thought, namely a thesis and antithesis and forms a “higher truth” called a synthesis, which becomes the new thesis. It is now combined with an antithesis, which again produces a synthesis, which again becomes a new thesis. The process continues until the ultimate “truth” is found. In this way, according to Marx, we will eventually attain the perfect state, free of class struggle. “It is the return of man himself as a social [being],” writes Marx.
The enemy to communism is capitalism with its division of labor and its division of the classes into property owners and property-less workers. Marx describes how the laborer is separated from the products he creates, his labor-power and from nature. He is alienated from his potential to become a universal being and master the universe. Abolishing capitalism will require that private property, religion, family and classical education are abolished and replaced by “free, conscious, creative social activity, in which man is not dominated by need, envy, or the desire to possess.” (Eugene Kamenka)
Marx predicts that the proletariat will rise up against the bourgeoisie and overthrow the state, as was the attempt during the French Revolution, but that it would not fail as in the French Revolution. He feels that no leader could liberate the proletariat, but the proletariat itself; nor could any ideology replace the theological understanding or the empirical insight of the perfect society, communism.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Karl Marx to Change the Way We Learn From History
I am reading Karl Marx works form my university class and am amazed at the parallels between his ideas and what is happening in our nation and world:
Although much of the world believes Marxism, do we realize that his ideas attempt to take over the Savior’s Divine Role. “The criticism of religion,” says Marx in 1844, “ends in the teaching that man is the highest being for man, it ends, that is, with the categorical imperative to overthrow all conditions in which man is a debased, forsaken, contemptible being forced into servitude.” In these words, Marx is planning on reducing all afflictions of mankind by eventually setting up communism. The Atonement of Christ redeems mankind from their sin and afflictions and it is only through him on the condition that we believe and keep his commandments and covenants. Our nation’s public education spends much of the time teaching multi-culturalism instead of the rich history and heritage. It’s goal is going towards teaching the embarrassing and the degrading class struggles just as Marx dictated. I fear that if we forget the stories, the heroes and the Lord’s hand in all the annals of history, we will lose the greatest heritage, that of the great founding of our country. Preparing to usher in the Restoration of the Gospel, many great and common people were led to find and found this land with good government. We can keep this if we study and learn from all facets of history, not just the facet of class struggle.
Although much of the world believes Marxism, do we realize that his ideas attempt to take over the Savior’s Divine Role. “The criticism of religion,” says Marx in 1844, “ends in the teaching that man is the highest being for man, it ends, that is, with the categorical imperative to overthrow all conditions in which man is a debased, forsaken, contemptible being forced into servitude.” In these words, Marx is planning on reducing all afflictions of mankind by eventually setting up communism. The Atonement of Christ redeems mankind from their sin and afflictions and it is only through him on the condition that we believe and keep his commandments and covenants. Our nation’s public education spends much of the time teaching multi-culturalism instead of the rich history and heritage. It’s goal is going towards teaching the embarrassing and the degrading class struggles just as Marx dictated. I fear that if we forget the stories, the heroes and the Lord’s hand in all the annals of history, we will lose the greatest heritage, that of the great founding of our country. Preparing to usher in the Restoration of the Gospel, many great and common people were led to find and found this land with good government. We can keep this if we study and learn from all facets of history, not just the facet of class struggle.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Book Review: Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith
A Brief Summary:
The natural processes of a successful economy are found in Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations. Although two hundred plus years old, Smith focuses on significantly profound and pertinent principles for any age. Stressing that regulations tend to limit prosperity and production, his extensive research of history and economics proves that a free market is an effective system in producing a wealthy nation. “The object of political economy of every country is to increase the riches and power of the country,” writes Smith. He proposes that wealth is built on labor, savings and investment. His labor theory of value regards “labor [as the] the real measure of the exchangeable value of all commodities [and that] the real price of everything is the toil and trouble of acquiring it.” Unlike our nation’s current course of consuming, Smith declares that saving is the sure path to wealth. He observes that, “Parsimony, and not industry is the immediate cause of the increase of capital.” Importantly, he measures the wealthiest nations as those who have a surplus to invest or to increase production. His main theme throughout is that great fortunes are made through a long life of industry, frugality, and careful saving.
My Response to Smith's Wealth of Nations:
Lamentably our country is in financial trouble. The future looks bleak as we contemplate the consequences of consumer and national debt, deflation of currency and an increase of government intervention and regulations. A close look at society will reveal that individuals as a majority are heavily in debt. What is the solution to this downward financial spiral? Do our societal choices mimic individual choices?
God, as a standard of what is right and wrong sets moral principles for promoting human happiness and progress. When those principles are followed, happiness and progress abounds. But the opposite is true that misery and decline follow when wrong choices are made. For example, a prodigal, who does not live within his means, destroys his capital and that of others. His idleness and prodigality encroaches upon the industry and capital of his progenitors. If a great number in a society follow his immoral example then society is in a state of debt and moral decline. Adam Smith states in his book, Wealth of Nations, that if prodigality is not compensated by frugality the path will lead to an impoverished country. Individuals must change if the society is to change. Change must come from the bottom up.
Supposing that Adam Smith is correct, I propose that the solution to our economic woes begin with individuals who are hard working and frugal, who save for a rainy day and who invest surplus income. Individually achieving these four principles will have a great affect in improving our nation’s economy. Smith affirms, “As capital of an individual can be increased only by what he saves from his annual revenue or his annual gains, so the capital for a society, which is the same with that of all the individuals who compose it, can be increased only in the same manner.” Sorry John Maynard Keynes, your philosophy of spending, debt and deflation of money has historically proven to send a nation to its ruin.
Smith explains that the principle of saving regularly is a natural expression of bettering oneself and that the greater the fortune, the greater ability to improve individual, familial and societal conditions provided that the individual is a moral person. “Capitals are increased by parsimony, and diminished by prodigality and misconduct,” writes Smith. Wealth is not built upon spending and consuming, but upon sound principles of careful investing, saving, frugality and parsimoniously living. If Smith’s principles are practiced, the nation’s downward spiral can be reversed.
The natural processes of a successful economy are found in Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations. Although two hundred plus years old, Smith focuses on significantly profound and pertinent principles for any age. Stressing that regulations tend to limit prosperity and production, his extensive research of history and economics proves that a free market is an effective system in producing a wealthy nation. “The object of political economy of every country is to increase the riches and power of the country,” writes Smith. He proposes that wealth is built on labor, savings and investment. His labor theory of value regards “labor [as the] the real measure of the exchangeable value of all commodities [and that] the real price of everything is the toil and trouble of acquiring it.” Unlike our nation’s current course of consuming, Smith declares that saving is the sure path to wealth. He observes that, “Parsimony, and not industry is the immediate cause of the increase of capital.” Importantly, he measures the wealthiest nations as those who have a surplus to invest or to increase production. His main theme throughout is that great fortunes are made through a long life of industry, frugality, and careful saving.
My Response to Smith's Wealth of Nations:
Lamentably our country is in financial trouble. The future looks bleak as we contemplate the consequences of consumer and national debt, deflation of currency and an increase of government intervention and regulations. A close look at society will reveal that individuals as a majority are heavily in debt. What is the solution to this downward financial spiral? Do our societal choices mimic individual choices?
God, as a standard of what is right and wrong sets moral principles for promoting human happiness and progress. When those principles are followed, happiness and progress abounds. But the opposite is true that misery and decline follow when wrong choices are made. For example, a prodigal, who does not live within his means, destroys his capital and that of others. His idleness and prodigality encroaches upon the industry and capital of his progenitors. If a great number in a society follow his immoral example then society is in a state of debt and moral decline. Adam Smith states in his book, Wealth of Nations, that if prodigality is not compensated by frugality the path will lead to an impoverished country. Individuals must change if the society is to change. Change must come from the bottom up.
Supposing that Adam Smith is correct, I propose that the solution to our economic woes begin with individuals who are hard working and frugal, who save for a rainy day and who invest surplus income. Individually achieving these four principles will have a great affect in improving our nation’s economy. Smith affirms, “As capital of an individual can be increased only by what he saves from his annual revenue or his annual gains, so the capital for a society, which is the same with that of all the individuals who compose it, can be increased only in the same manner.” Sorry John Maynard Keynes, your philosophy of spending, debt and deflation of money has historically proven to send a nation to its ruin.
Smith explains that the principle of saving regularly is a natural expression of bettering oneself and that the greater the fortune, the greater ability to improve individual, familial and societal conditions provided that the individual is a moral person. “Capitals are increased by parsimony, and diminished by prodigality and misconduct,” writes Smith. Wealth is not built upon spending and consuming, but upon sound principles of careful investing, saving, frugality and parsimoniously living. If Smith’s principles are practiced, the nation’s downward spiral can be reversed.
Saturday, August 8, 2009
A Vision to Improve Family
A great family has a vision of purpose or mission—they actively create their life together while other families are created by life, passively waiting to see where their life’s activities take them next. A successful family improves the environment by working hard along side each other in such activities as chores, family meals, routines, family meetings, trainings and spiritual worship. Of course, they are not perfect, but they know a few secrets that help them to be successful.
An attitude of serving each other is a significant link to a successful and happy family. It enlivens the giver and favors the receiver. The Arbinger Institute has discovered a solution to an age-old dilemma of behavioral problems. In their book, The Choice, it infers that responding to others in service is the root of our personal happiness. They observe that on the surface, humans differ extensively, but below that surface and at the level of who we are, there are only two ways that we differ—we either respond to others needs or we resist their needs. By seeing another as a “person” we respond to them in a personal and caring way. By seeing them as an “object” we inadvertently resist their needs.
When we choose to see another as an object we habitually form false ideas in our mind, thus we betray ourselves. An example would be when a mother senses a need to bond with a child, and does not follow through; she is soon filled with guilt. But rather than returning to her responsibility of following through, she begins to put her blame on someone or something. In this case, she begins to fill her mind with degrading thoughts about her husband and his neglect of the child in question. She, therefore, transferred her responsibility (her feeling that she should bond with her child) to someone else. The moment we choose to resist any individual’s need is the moment we go down the dark path of self-betrayal.
If we choose to resist service to others we are betraying our deepest sense of what is right. When we positively respond to another’s need, we portray our deepest sense of what is right.
Leading by example coupled with real intent is an effective tool to silently teach. Individuals learn more perfectly from a leader’s example. A parent acting how he wants his child to act will have a greater impact on what they become than from any other manner of teaching. Expedition leader Ernest Shackleton portrayed an excellent standard of example on Britain’s Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition of 1914. Upon asking his men to do something, he would be the first to comply. All of the men on the voyage survived the difficult expedition because of the morale and good attitude learned from their leader’s example. One of his men wrote that [Shackleton] was “the greatest leader ever came on God’s earth, bar none.” Similarly, a parent’s example and pure motive will empower their children to become well behaved.
Michael E. Gerber, of The E-Myth Revisited, enlightens the reader on the attitude that drives example, “The work we do is a reflection of who we are. If we’re sloppy at it, it’s because we’re sloppy inside. If we’re late at it, it’s because we’re late inside. If we’re bored by it, it’s because we’re bored inside, with ourselves, not with the work. The most menial work can be a piece of art when done by an artist. So the job here is not outside of us, but inside of us. How we do our work becomes a mirror of how we are inside.” Those with whom we live exemplify the vision of who we are.
Success in the family depends a great deal on selfless service and genuine example.
It is not enough to live together, eat together and work together. Positively responding to one another will enhance relationships plus improve morale and behavior. In this setting, family meals, meetings and trainings become more meaningful and chores feel more like charitable service.
—Julie Greenman
An attitude of serving each other is a significant link to a successful and happy family. It enlivens the giver and favors the receiver. The Arbinger Institute has discovered a solution to an age-old dilemma of behavioral problems. In their book, The Choice, it infers that responding to others in service is the root of our personal happiness. They observe that on the surface, humans differ extensively, but below that surface and at the level of who we are, there are only two ways that we differ—we either respond to others needs or we resist their needs. By seeing another as a “person” we respond to them in a personal and caring way. By seeing them as an “object” we inadvertently resist their needs.
When we choose to see another as an object we habitually form false ideas in our mind, thus we betray ourselves. An example would be when a mother senses a need to bond with a child, and does not follow through; she is soon filled with guilt. But rather than returning to her responsibility of following through, she begins to put her blame on someone or something. In this case, she begins to fill her mind with degrading thoughts about her husband and his neglect of the child in question. She, therefore, transferred her responsibility (her feeling that she should bond with her child) to someone else. The moment we choose to resist any individual’s need is the moment we go down the dark path of self-betrayal.
If we choose to resist service to others we are betraying our deepest sense of what is right. When we positively respond to another’s need, we portray our deepest sense of what is right.
Leading by example coupled with real intent is an effective tool to silently teach. Individuals learn more perfectly from a leader’s example. A parent acting how he wants his child to act will have a greater impact on what they become than from any other manner of teaching. Expedition leader Ernest Shackleton portrayed an excellent standard of example on Britain’s Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition of 1914. Upon asking his men to do something, he would be the first to comply. All of the men on the voyage survived the difficult expedition because of the morale and good attitude learned from their leader’s example. One of his men wrote that [Shackleton] was “the greatest leader ever came on God’s earth, bar none.” Similarly, a parent’s example and pure motive will empower their children to become well behaved.
Michael E. Gerber, of The E-Myth Revisited, enlightens the reader on the attitude that drives example, “The work we do is a reflection of who we are. If we’re sloppy at it, it’s because we’re sloppy inside. If we’re late at it, it’s because we’re late inside. If we’re bored by it, it’s because we’re bored inside, with ourselves, not with the work. The most menial work can be a piece of art when done by an artist. So the job here is not outside of us, but inside of us. How we do our work becomes a mirror of how we are inside.” Those with whom we live exemplify the vision of who we are.
Success in the family depends a great deal on selfless service and genuine example.
It is not enough to live together, eat together and work together. Positively responding to one another will enhance relationships plus improve morale and behavior. In this setting, family meals, meetings and trainings become more meaningful and chores feel more like charitable service.
—Julie Greenman
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Classical Math Evokes Higher Learning
For some, arithmetic has never been a favorite subject. However, most of us have enough understanding of it to get along in life. While it is true that many current educational systems use the modern methods of teaching and learning math, the focus is mainly on applied math. In the past, the study of math was not always limited to the application of the concepts, but was dedicated to the study of the math philosophy of the great mathematical minds such as Nicomachus, Euclid and others. There are a handful of schools and universities that are becoming successful in returning to the age-old way of learning—with the classics. This method of study seems to evoke an unquenchable desire for more knowledge. The following are considered to be two reasons why classical math may contribute to a greater desire for learning.
Many human beings, with or without realizing it, search for a higher power whether it is God or some other being. When educational studies recognize that higher being, it seems to strike a familiar chord within and creates a significant increase of learning. Classical math philosophy recognizes a supreme creator. Nicomachus of Gerasa (100 A.D.) explains in his two-volume book, An Introduction to Arithmetic, that the patterns in math are conceived “by divine nature, [and] not by [man’s] convention or agreement.” He further expounds that everything existing in nature that has a systematic method “seems both in part and as a whole to have been determined and ordered in accordance with number, by…him that created all things; for the pattern was fixed, like a preliminary sketch, by the domination of number preexistent in the mind of the world-creating God…so that with reference to it, as to an artistic plan, should be created all these things, time, motion, the heavens, the stars, all sorts of revolutions.” In essence he is reminding us that numbers have existed infinitely and eternally and are an integral part the knowledge of God, which is an inspiring prospect
Another aspect is man’s desire for truth. Truth is something that does not change over time, but stays the same uniformly and as Nicomachus says, “never departs even briefly from its existence.” Those that search for the truth and apply it are known to be full of wisdom. Pythagoras (580-490 BC) defined wisdom as the knowledge of the truth as it applies to the knowledge and comprehension of reality—and this he said is the only wisdom.
Plato describes the way to become wise in the mathematical realm when he says, “Every diagram, system of numbers, every scheme of harmony, and every law of the movement of the stars, ought to appear [as] one to him who studies rightly.” He then recommends his reader to study all things regarding them as one principle all bonded together in one great whole. Then he gives this warning to those seeking for an easier way of study, “if only one attempts philosophy in any other way he must call on Fortune to assist him. For there is never a path without these; this is the way, these the studies, be they hard or easy; by this course must one go, and not neglect it. The one who has attained all these things…I for my part call wisest, and this I maintain through thick and thin” As math is a difficult subject to comprehend for some and is often avoided, it is definitely enhanced with the classics. Classical math philosophy is a powerful supplement to applied math as it assists man in his search for truth.
It is not at a desk with a math workbook where one usually feels inspired. However, coupled with the text of one or two of the great mathematicians, one is certain to find insights into the magnificent mathematical world and have a clearer vision of how everything works as a whole. Education is meant to be inspiring and should serve as an avenue to acquire knowledge of God and man. The classic works combined with math concepts will achieve that goal.
—Julie Greenman
Nicomachus of Gerasa, Introduction to Arithmetic, Great Books of the Western World, Ed. R.M. Hutchins, (Chicago: ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA, INC., 1952)
Many human beings, with or without realizing it, search for a higher power whether it is God or some other being. When educational studies recognize that higher being, it seems to strike a familiar chord within and creates a significant increase of learning. Classical math philosophy recognizes a supreme creator. Nicomachus of Gerasa (100 A.D.) explains in his two-volume book, An Introduction to Arithmetic, that the patterns in math are conceived “by divine nature, [and] not by [man’s] convention or agreement.” He further expounds that everything existing in nature that has a systematic method “seems both in part and as a whole to have been determined and ordered in accordance with number, by…him that created all things; for the pattern was fixed, like a preliminary sketch, by the domination of number preexistent in the mind of the world-creating God…so that with reference to it, as to an artistic plan, should be created all these things, time, motion, the heavens, the stars, all sorts of revolutions.” In essence he is reminding us that numbers have existed infinitely and eternally and are an integral part the knowledge of God, which is an inspiring prospect
Another aspect is man’s desire for truth. Truth is something that does not change over time, but stays the same uniformly and as Nicomachus says, “never departs even briefly from its existence.” Those that search for the truth and apply it are known to be full of wisdom. Pythagoras (580-490 BC) defined wisdom as the knowledge of the truth as it applies to the knowledge and comprehension of reality—and this he said is the only wisdom.
Plato describes the way to become wise in the mathematical realm when he says, “Every diagram, system of numbers, every scheme of harmony, and every law of the movement of the stars, ought to appear [as] one to him who studies rightly.” He then recommends his reader to study all things regarding them as one principle all bonded together in one great whole. Then he gives this warning to those seeking for an easier way of study, “if only one attempts philosophy in any other way he must call on Fortune to assist him. For there is never a path without these; this is the way, these the studies, be they hard or easy; by this course must one go, and not neglect it. The one who has attained all these things…I for my part call wisest, and this I maintain through thick and thin” As math is a difficult subject to comprehend for some and is often avoided, it is definitely enhanced with the classics. Classical math philosophy is a powerful supplement to applied math as it assists man in his search for truth.
It is not at a desk with a math workbook where one usually feels inspired. However, coupled with the text of one or two of the great mathematicians, one is certain to find insights into the magnificent mathematical world and have a clearer vision of how everything works as a whole. Education is meant to be inspiring and should serve as an avenue to acquire knowledge of God and man. The classic works combined with math concepts will achieve that goal.
—Julie Greenman
Nicomachus of Gerasa, Introduction to Arithmetic, Great Books of the Western World, Ed. R.M. Hutchins, (Chicago: ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA, INC., 1952)
Sunday, July 26, 2009
A Lesson for Mothers from Moses and the Children of Israel
Moses led the children of Israel from Egyptian bondage. His goal was to take them to the Promised Land. The length of trip undoubtedly exceeded his expectations since they wandered for 40 years. What took them so long? They would have arrived dozens of years before had it not been for their rebellion and disobedience to God. It was during this time that the Lord had to instigate a lesser law suitable for them to understand. The lesser law consisted of a set of laws for almost every action with a consequence for disobedience. It seemed that the Children of Israel could not be counted upon to make their own decisions and had to rely on the strong Mosaic Law to force them to comply.
Paul teaches in Galatians that the lesser law was instituted to help the Israelites proceed closer to the higher law—that of acceptance and faith in Christ. Parenting is similar to the way God dealt with the children of Israel: Just as the children of Israel lived under the lesser law, our children also live a lesser law. Our children live under many rules and consequences given by parents. Little by little they are taught and can understand the higher law and their own knowledge guides them—as this transformation takes place, they no longer need the lesser law or their parent’s constant guidance, they will begin to live the higher law and guide themselves.
Faith is eventually developed and becomes the guiding force for the individual to live the higher law. Paul teaches, “But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the [Mosaic] law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.” (Galatians 3:23-25) Our motherly task, therefore, should be to instill the powerful principle of faith into the hearts of our children.
In another part of the world we contemplate youth that are guided by faith. It was Helaman’s two thousand stripling warriors who “had been taught by their mothers, that if they did not doubt, God would deliver them.” Their faith was so great that they were freed from death in the great battles against the Lamanite people.
The vision that is created by studying the story of Moses and the Children of Israel is one of hope to modern mothers. The metaphor descriptively chronicles the different stages of youth and gives a perspective of what to work towards. By understanding Moses’ patience, long-suffering and constant guidance towards his people, a mother can learn to develop essential qualities needed to guide her children.
Rebels or not, all children need guidance from faithful mothers who are not concerned about the repetitive teaching and reminding. At times young mothers or mothers of teenagers lose hope and vision because their children fail to live up to their seemingly high expectations. They are expecting their children to live the higher law prematurely. Repetition and reminders are principles employed constantly in the story of Ancient Israel and eventually will lead a child to find the faith required to live the higher law. Meanwhile a mother should develop the essential qualities to live the higher law as an effective example in guiding her children.
The process of guiding a child to the higher law may seldom be a forty-year plan, but many agree that it is longer than expected. With a given set of rules and consequences coupled with a patient mother who knows the importance of quality teaching and gentle reminding, the youth of today will arrive at the promised destination of a faith-filled life.
—Julie Greenman
Paul teaches in Galatians that the lesser law was instituted to help the Israelites proceed closer to the higher law—that of acceptance and faith in Christ. Parenting is similar to the way God dealt with the children of Israel: Just as the children of Israel lived under the lesser law, our children also live a lesser law. Our children live under many rules and consequences given by parents. Little by little they are taught and can understand the higher law and their own knowledge guides them—as this transformation takes place, they no longer need the lesser law or their parent’s constant guidance, they will begin to live the higher law and guide themselves.
Faith is eventually developed and becomes the guiding force for the individual to live the higher law. Paul teaches, “But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the [Mosaic] law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.” (Galatians 3:23-25) Our motherly task, therefore, should be to instill the powerful principle of faith into the hearts of our children.
In another part of the world we contemplate youth that are guided by faith. It was Helaman’s two thousand stripling warriors who “had been taught by their mothers, that if they did not doubt, God would deliver them.” Their faith was so great that they were freed from death in the great battles against the Lamanite people.
The vision that is created by studying the story of Moses and the Children of Israel is one of hope to modern mothers. The metaphor descriptively chronicles the different stages of youth and gives a perspective of what to work towards. By understanding Moses’ patience, long-suffering and constant guidance towards his people, a mother can learn to develop essential qualities needed to guide her children.
Rebels or not, all children need guidance from faithful mothers who are not concerned about the repetitive teaching and reminding. At times young mothers or mothers of teenagers lose hope and vision because their children fail to live up to their seemingly high expectations. They are expecting their children to live the higher law prematurely. Repetition and reminders are principles employed constantly in the story of Ancient Israel and eventually will lead a child to find the faith required to live the higher law. Meanwhile a mother should develop the essential qualities to live the higher law as an effective example in guiding her children.
The process of guiding a child to the higher law may seldom be a forty-year plan, but many agree that it is longer than expected. With a given set of rules and consequences coupled with a patient mother who knows the importance of quality teaching and gentle reminding, the youth of today will arrive at the promised destination of a faith-filled life.
—Julie Greenman
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Friday, May 29, 2009
My Response to The Choice
Recently I went about my day practicing new principles from a book I read. I not only failed miserably, but now I know the source of all my problems-ME. That knowledge is hard to grasp, especially when I am resisting it. But why would I resist something that would bring me more
joy and happiness than I have yet experienced? Chances are that human nature wants me to believe I am faultless, flawless and can do no wrong. Then along comes a book that tells me plainly that I am the cause of all my unhappiness. Would not most resist under that condition? Alas, the act of resistance is the greatest inhibitor of change.
The Arbinger Institute and their team of authors have enlightened the world of psychology in their pocket-sized book, The Choice. Never before have I seen an age-old problem so clearly understood, defined and resolved. Their remedy to relational situations far exceeds the popular material that we read today about human behavior and relationships. Of course, comprehension and change seems easier on paper than is the reality of truly changing oneself. The intention of this paper is to explain the simple process of change as described by the Arbinger Institute.
Two Choices: Respond or Resist
A situation arises and we choose whether we are going to respond or resist. By seeing others as people, we can respond when they have a need and act in service toward them. By seeing others as objects, they become obstacles and problems in our way. We refuse to serve them and spend the rest of the time blaming, justifying and resenting. The pathway is dark and lonesome; it is the course to self-betrayal.
A very recent experience taught me that I am unaware of the choices I make until it is too late and I have made the choice to resist, heading down the path of self-betrayal. I wondered if I had this experience because some hand of Providence wanted me to see clearly how habitual I had become in resisting service. The choice of resistance is an unhealthy habit. When we choose to resist, we slide down the slippery slope of suffering and self-betrayal. As we are presented with situations to serve we can stop and think what will be our choice: to resist or to respond.
Serving Others
If I were to respond instead of resist I could effect a change in me. The only catch is that I need others in which to respond. It isn’t enough to make that change on my own. Clearly, other people are essential to my quest for change. The authors explain that “my responsiveness to others’ needs is my deepest sense of what is right” and by serving them I do right and feel happy. Change only takes place by forgetting myself in response to others. Jesus taught the same principle when He said, ”For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.” Change will come as we serve those around us.
The choice is undoubtedly my responsibility. Unlike in the first paragraph, it is not a question of resisting, but a question of choice. Will I choose to serve by responding to a need or will I choose to resist? My happiness and satisfaction hinge upon my responding to others’ needs. That knowledge is easier to grasp.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Summary of The Choice, by The Arbinger Institute
The book is founded upon our view of how we see people. When we are responsive, we see others as people and when we are resistant we see them as objects. Seeing others as people we are seeing them truly and thus we are true to ourselves. Perceiving others as objects we are resistant to their reality and see them falsely, consequently we are false.
Seeing others falsely, we resist them, thus we do wrong, then we seek to be justified, then we begin to see “a world that makes the wrong seem right.” The consequences are numerous when we are resistant. We find fault and place blame on others; self-betrayal magnifies others’ problems; seeing falsely we walk in darkness; and finally we become consumed with self.
The authors touch on some widely accepted behavioral views such as Psychodynamic Tradition, behaviorism, humanism, and cognitive theory teaching that they all have one thing in common: helping people to cope in a resistant, self-betrayal state. Their response to these popular views is that we must change to be responsive and that the only way to change from resistant to responsive is to forget ourselves in the service to others.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Standing Up For What Is Right and True
We need to serve our families, community and nation. Service is the action word for love. I like to think of the compassionate bishop in Les Miserables who transforms the guilty and desperate Jean Valjean with a single service of love. His life is altered in such a way by that solitary act that he is compelled by some unseen power to give his life in service to the forlorn and neglected Cozette and others. Similarly, we can do as the bishop and be forgiving, kind, selfless in our ministrations and charitable. That alone has the power to change our nation.
Our decisions determine our liberty. We the people are not only the cause of our nation's problems, but WE ARE THE SOLUTION. "Will you join in our crusade, who will be strong and stand with me?", say the lyrics in the song from Les Mis called, Do You Hear The People Sing? I invite all of you to stand up for what is right by rolling up your sleeves and serving your spouse, your child, an elderly grandparent, a neighbor, a worthy community program etc. Together we can form a powerful band to spread peace and freedom.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Prince Richard
Here is the movie they created:
Thursday, March 12, 2009
The Joy Comes
Today I attended the Parent/Teacher conference of my one daughter who is still in Public School. She is an eighth-grader. While walking down the hall towards her teachers we stopped to talk to the counselor, Mrs. Ramsey. She was full of emotion as she told me how much she loved our Elissa. She said that she had told her returned-missionary-son about Elissa and how wonderful she is (that someday she would make a tremendous wife) and that he should finish his bacchelors degree, go on to get a masters and by then she should be old enough to marry. Of course, that made my heart soar (not that we had made a match for her, but that she is growing to be that young person I was describing in the first paragraph).
During the conferences many of the people told how helpful and good she is, but one in particular, Bonnie Fronk, told me of her love for Elissa. Today I felt Elissa's goodness and knew that she was developing into a beautiful young lady.
Later while visiting with Emily and Andrew's Seminary teachers I was showered with more good comments about their characters. Andrew's said that he is always anxious to participate and Emily's said she is growing to be an outstanding young woman. I walked away from that building with joy in my heart.
In the evening, after the Online Georgics Class that Andrew and I are taking we got an email from one of the other participants (a mother) who wrote us this email. (Her name has been changed.)
On Mar 12, 2009, at 7:22 PM, Helen Hansen wrote:
Julie,My name is Helen Hansen. I am a member of the Georgics class and I have been very impressed with Andrew. I have a 12 year old son and I was wondering if you could give me some pointers on what you as a mother did (I know there was something) that helped or inspired Andrew to become the marvelous young man that he is. I have only homeschooled for a little over a year but I am struggling with how to inspire my son. I also have a 12 year old daughter who has just taken off but because they are the same age it is difficult to watch him remain behind. It is also difficult because my daughter is very much like me in personality and learning styles and so it is easier for me to inspire her because I can relate. Anyway, Andrew has just been very impressive. I would like to ask him what motivated him to become what he is as well.Thank you so much,
Helen Hansen
Here is my answer to her:
Helen,
You are very kind. We have only been homeschooling for a little over a year also. Andrew and I have just been discussing what inspired him and we came up with this list below. If there is any one of these that you would like me to expound upon, just let me know. We have Skype capabilities and could video conference if you would like.
1. Work, work and work. (whenever there was lazyness, defiance or contention, I had him and any other sibling do work) Inspiration only comes when we are working.
2. I would lay out some good reads and ask him if he had read any of them, if not, I would ask him if he would like me to summarize them and then let him choose one to read. Sometimes I even read the first few chapters to get him hooked (Carry On, Mr. Bowditch and The Lonesome Gods were some of them that I did this with)
3. Schedule, I made sure that we kept a schedule of math time, reading time and writing time (scheduling time, not content)
4. Andrew liked it when I would kidnap him and take him to a restaurant where we would have an interview and discussion of what I could do better and what he could do better.
5. Parent/youth interviews every Sunday
6. More work
7. Lots of prayer and pondering
8. After lots of prayer we kind of fell into a reading/study group with a few peers. They met each week and discussed an assigned book in a colloquium format. This was very motivating for him and a Godsend. After the study group and after the summer, our group became a Commonwealth School that offers the LEMI classes called Key of Liberty and Shakespeare. Also a Godsend. It is a once a week class with reading and writing assignments.
9. More prayer.
10. Helping to mentor David (Andrew's dad and my sweet husband) to see and understand the idea of homeschooling. Dave has just begun to see some good with this… and… as he has progressed in this understanding so has Andrew begun to be self-directed.
11. Also, and I am not sure how much of a difference this one makes, but we are adamant about having family meals together, family scripture study, family home evening, very limited computer and video time, no video games or hand-held devices and no TV ever (we don't have them-except for a TV for occasional videos).
I hope this helps a little. Andrew has come a long way in such a short time, but I would never had believed it could happen last January 2008 when we began. I truly think it has been a combination of the above. I am also known around my house as a perpetual repeater of teachings. We have frequent discussions of the phases in a Thomas Jefferson Education (Core, Love of Learning, Scholar and Depth) and I ask my children where they think they are on any given day. I also discuss things that I am reading (I am a distance student of George Wythe University) and inspire them with the ideas that are running through my mind at the time.
He has impressed me too, come to think of it. I just told him that it has been God who has molded him into what he is now and I have just been here to help facilitate it. Thank you so much for your compliments and have a nice night.
Julie
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Thoughts regarding the Stimulus Bill from "The Cause of Liberty"
Friday, February 27, 2009
Doom and Gloom is an attitude of the Scarcity Mentality
Do I think that people should try to pay their mortgage down as fast as they can in order to save their skin? No! Do I think that people should learn wisdom in crisis? Yes! Do I think that people should continue to save money regularly to bring down consumer debt? Yes! It is true that the value of our homes will continue to drop to its necessary place on the chart and yes, it is probable that it will dip well below the average just as it did during the 1930's depression and WWII. But we have good reason to believe that it will eventually come to its average place when we have recovered from our economic disaster. The former statement should not cause us to panic while declaring the fateful attitude of doom and gloom to all our loved ones and friends, but should teach us that runaway consumer spending always will come back to haunt us. Economic and political knowledge coupled with hope and cheerfulness can replace the negative and inspire an abundance mentality.
Folks, let us save a little more money each day; be a little more frugal; be hopeful and full of wisdom as we encourage others to do the same.
Heart-Stopping Housing Chart
In this video of Glenn Beck's we can see that knowledge is power. I am amazed that when we understand economics and history we can comprehend what needs to be done in any given situation.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Freedom vs. Dependence?
It says in Federalist Paper No. 1, "it will be equally forgotten that the vigor [health] of government is essential to the security of liberty; that, in the contemplation of a sound and well-informed judgment, their interest can never be separated; and that a dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people than under the forbidden appearance of zeal for the firmness and efficiency of government. History will teach us that the former has been found a much more certain road to the introduction of despotism than the latter, and that of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people; commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants."
I don't know why we have come to a point that we desire dependence upon the government to bail us out. I may be wrong, but it seems like the leaders are "paying an obsequious court to the people". I am not quite sure that the stimulus package is such a good idea. For instance, (supposing that I lived twice as long as Methuselah) if I were to spend $1,000,000 (one million dollars) per day since the day Christ was born I would have spent $733,285,000,000 (almost $54 billion dollars less than what the stimulus package is today). I still have not got over the previous stimulus packages of last year. I can't exactly put my finger on it, but they seem so wrong to me.
I was reading Marion G. Romney's article in the March 2009 Ensign today called "The Celestial Nature of Self-Reliance" wherein he teaches the danger of dependence on well-meaning welfare programs. Here is an excerpt that teaches the principle:
Gullible Gulls
I clipped the following article from the Reader’s Digest some time ago. It reads:
“In our friendly neighbor city of St. Augustine great flocks of sea gulls are starving amid plenty. Fishing is still good, but the gulls don’t know how to fish. For generations they have depended on the shrimp fleet to toss them scraps from the nets. Now the fleet has moved. …
“The shrimpers had created a Welfare State for the … sea gulls. The big birds never bothered to learn how to fish for themselves and they never taught their children to fish. Instead they led their little ones to the shrimp nets.
“Now the sea gulls, the fine free birds that almost symbolize liberty itself, are starving to death because they gave in to the ‘something for nothing’ lure! They sacrificed their independence for a handout.
“A lot of people are like that, too. They see nothing wrong in picking delectable scraps from the tax nets of the U.S. Government’s ‘shrimp fleet.’ But what will happen when the Government runs out of goods? What about our children of generations to come?
“Let’s not be gullible gulls. We … must preserve our talents of self-sufficiency, our genius for creating things for ourselves, our sense of thrift and our true love of independence.” Fable of the Gullible Gull, Reader's Digest, Oct. 1950, 32.
The practice of coveting and receiving unearned benefits has now become so fixed in our society that even men of wealth, possessing the means to produce more wealth, are expecting the government to guarantee them a profit. Elections often turn on what the candidates promise to do for voters from government funds. This practice, if universally accepted and implemented in any society, will make slaves of its citizens.
We cannot afford to become wards of the government, even if we have a legal right to do so. It requires too great a sacrifice of self-respect and political, temporal, and spiritual independence.
In some countries it is extremely difficult to separate earned from unearned benefits. However, the principle is the same in all countries: We should strive to become self-reliant and not depend on others for our existence.
Governments are not the only guilty parties. We fear many parents are making “gullible gulls” out of their children with their permissiveness and their doling out of family resources. In fact, the actions of parents in this area can be more devastating than any government program.
Bishops and other priesthood leaders can be guilty of making “gullible gulls” out of their ward members. Some members become financially or emotionally dependent on their bishops. A dole is a dole whatever its source. All of our Church and family actions should be directed toward making our children and members self-reliant. We can’t always control government programs, but we can control our own homes and congregations. If we will teach these principles and live them, we can do much to counter the negative effects which may exist in government programs in any country.
We know there are some who, for reasons beyond their control, cannot become self-reliant. President Henry D. Moyle had these people in mind when he said:
“This great principle does not deny to the needy nor to the poor the assistance they should have. The wholly incapacitated, the aged, the sickly are cared for with all tenderness, but every able-bodied person is enjoined to do his utmost for himself to avoid dependence, if his own efforts can make such a course possible; to look upon adversity as temporary; to combine his faith in his own ability with honest toil. …
“We believe [that] seldom [do circumstances arise in which] men of rigorous faith, genuine courage, and unfaltering determination, with the love of independence burning in their hearts, and pride in their own accomplishments, cannot surmount the obstacles that lie in their paths.”3
What does the Stimulus package mean for us? For the many generations to come? What can we do to help our economy without going into exorbitant and unreasonable debt? What are your suggestions?
There is great wisdom in studying the scriptures that teach us the pride cycle; there is wisdom in hearing the counsel from our prophets and apostles that tell us to stay out of debt; live frugally; serve and help the needy; build up our stores of food, clothing, and money; obey the commandments; fast and pray for our needs and those of our leaders and for our Barack Obama. There just might be some wisdom in studying the histories that grace our libraries. Wouldn't it be wonderful if these histories graced our minds more often…
Maybe the single most important thing we can do is to fix ourselves individually before we can fix our ailing nation. Confucius said it best when he wrote, "The ancients who wished to illustrate illustrious virtue throughout the kingdom, first ordered well their own states. Wishing to order well their states, they first regulated their families. Wishing to regulate their families, they first cultivated their persons. Wishing to cultivate their persons, they first rectified their hearts. Wishing to rectify their hearts, they first sought to be sincere in their thoughts. Wishing to be sincere in their thoughts, they first extended to the utmost their knowledge. Such extension of knowledge lay in the investigation of things. Things being investigated, knowledge became complete.
Their knowledge being complete, their thoughts were sincere. Their thoughts being sincere, their hearts were then rectified. Their hearts being rectified, their persons were cultivated. Their persons being cultivated, their families were regulated. Their families being regulated, their states were rightly governed. Their states being rightly governed, the whole kingdom was made tranquil and happy."
I have hope that each of us can make small and constant improvements in our lives and that as we do it will eventually spread throughout our nation and the world making the whole a pleasant and fairly peaceful place, eventually. Of coarse, that is the ideal…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)