Marxism and Libertarianism; Cinderella’s Two Ugly Stepsisters

in the end the Libertarian vision and the Marxist vision share a common teleology in terms of their vision for the future. Both envision the eventual withering away of the State. The Marxists envision it happening by way of abolishing private property. The Libertarians envisions it happening by exalting the ownership of property to the Highest good of politics. The Marxists envisions it happening by absolutizing the State so as to deny private property. The Libertarians envision it happening by completely eliminating the State so as eliminate the commons. However, each vision is pursued to the end of some fanciful Utopia.

Both Libertarianianism and Marxism articulate a anthropology that reduces man to homo econonomicus. Both view man as the sum of his economic decisions.

Both Libertarianism and Marxism get the One and the Many wrong. The Libertarian extinguishes the One in favor of the Many and the Marxist extinguishes the Many in favor of the One. Taken together they are Van Til’s “Rational” and “Irrational” wash women taking in each others laundry.

Libertarianism is all particulars and no Universals. Marxism is all Universals and no particulars. Libertarianism gives us beads without holes. Marxism gives us strings that have no ends.

Further, both Liberrtarianism and Marxism lose the idea of the Transcendent Objective. This is seen most clearly in ethics for the Marxism, while for the Libertarians the absence of the Objective transcendent is seen most clearly in the absence of any objective standard of a just price or wage. Both Libertarianism and Marxism suffer from the subjectivity of Monism that always affects those who do not have a vigorous understanding of Transcendence.
One solves ABSOLUTELY NOTHING by championing Libertariansim over Marxism.

R2K Channeling German Hegelians

Christian Ernst Luthard wrote in 1867: “The Gospel has absolutely nothing to do with outward existence but only with eternal life, not with external orders and institutions which could come in conflict with the secular orders but only with the heart and its relationship with God. . . . It is not the vocation of Jesus Christ or of the Gospel to change the orders of secular life and establish them anew. . . . Christianity wants to change man’s heart, not his external situation.”

Rudolf Sohm (1841–1917), speaking to a convention on the main Christian social action group, the Inner Mission, asserted: “The Gospel frees us from this world, frees us from all questions of this world, frees us inwardly, also from the questions of public life, also from the social question. Christianity has no answer to these questions.” The issues of public life, he wrote, “should remain untouched by the proclamation of the Gospel, completely untouched.”

Wilhelm Hermann declared in the 1913 edition of his book on ethics that the state was a product of nature and that it could not be love but only self‑assertion, coercion, and law. . . . Once the Christian understood the moral significance of the state, then “he will consider obedience to the government to be the highest vocation within the state. For the authority of the state on the whole, resting as it does upon authority of the government, is more important than the elimination of any shortcomings which it might have.”

Robert Benne makes the following good points on the effects of this type of thinking:

“There are two serious theological problems here. For one, the affirmation of the Sovereign God as Creator, Sustainer, and Judge of all is forgotten. The God whose will is revealed in the commandments and in his involvement in history is somehow expunged from the political world. Along with this denial of God’s involvement in history is the elevation of the gospel to such a height that it has no relevance to ordinary life. The gospel addresses only the inner man about eternal life, not the whole man who is embedded in God’s history.”

Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/15001/self-neutralized-church-rise-adolf-hitler/#J0K7voCexIzAPiP4.99

Sentimental LUV

“Unconditional love is a more revolutionary concept than any other doctrine of revolution. Unconditional love means the end of discrimination between good and evil, right and wrong, better and worse, friend and enemy, and all things else. Whenever anyone asks you to love unconditionally, they are asking you to surrender unconditionally to the enemy.

Unconditional love is contrary to the Bible. The charge of the young prophet Jehu, the son of Hanani, to King Jehoshaphat was blunt: “Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the Lord” (II Chronicles 19:2). The commandment is “Ye that love the Lord, hate evil” (Psalm 97:10), and the prophet Amos repeated it: “Hate the evil, and love the good, and establish judgment in the gate” (Amos 5:15)….

The enemy of God’s justice and God’s law, of fundamental law and order, must not be loved. To love them is to condone their evil. The accusation of the psalmist is to the point: “18 When thou sawest a thief, thou consentedst with him, And hast been partaker with adulterers” (Psalm 50:18). What we condone morally, we also approve of or delight in. Those who preach unconditional love are simply trying to disarm godly people in order that that evil may triumph.”

R. J. Rushdoony
“Roots of Reconstruction” p. 625

The Importance Of Hell

When hell drops out of Christianity, justice drops out of the social order.

Justice as it exists for violation of man by man and hell as it exists for violation of God by unrepentant man are connected by the linkage of the just visiting of proper penalty for outrage against a person. In Christianity, Hell is justice for violation of God’s person. God, being seen as the most August person, consigns men to hell for the injustice of rebellion against His exalted person. It is a matter of celestial justice. As such, once Hell drops out of our reckoning, there are ripple effects for our understanding of justice as between man and man. If there is no longer justice of Hell, for the penalty of injustice against God, then there will also be diminution of justice as it pertains to man and man. If man refuses to acknowledge Hell as the proper justice for violation of God’s person, so man will refuse to acknowledge Biblical justice for social order violations. Horizontal justice between offended man by offending man is dependent upon Vertical justice between an offended God by offending man.

People believe that they are offering a nicer Christianity and a nicer God by deleting the idea of hell from the Christian faith, but in reality they are offering a crueler Christianity since a hell-less Christianity leaves a Christianity where God’s Holy and exalted character, which the reality of Hell upheld and protected, is eclipsed. Getting rid of Hell, gets rid of the Holiness of God.

Hell-less Christianity is also a crueler Christianity because in hell-less Christianity we have a Christ on the cross paying the penalty for sin so that men might be delivered from hell. But if Hell doesn’t exist then the death of Christ was and is superfluous. To void the truth of Hell from Christianity is to diminish the work of Christ because Christ died to take on the penalty of Hell for the elect.

R2K Introduces New Lyrics To Old Children’s Sunday School Song

“[2K] also teaches that the nature of genuine religion is precisely private, personal, and not something for public display or consumption. . . .Which invites the question: If it is possible to keep such essential aspects of faith as prayer and almsgiving private, even within the privacy of one’s devotional life, why wouldn’t it be possible for a serious believer to keep that faith bracketed once entering the public square or the voting booth? The very essence of faith, at least the Christian variety, might be that it is private, personal, and something to keep distinct from expression in the public arena of politics.”

D. Gnostic Hart
A Secular Faith, pp. 176-177

This little light of mine
I’m gonna hide its shine
This little light of mine
I’m gonna hide its shine
Hide its shine
Hide its shine
Hide its shine

Hide it under a Bushel?
Oh YEAH! I’m gonna hide its shine
Hide it under a Bushel?
Oh YEAH! I’m gonna hide its shine
Hide its shine
Hide its shine
Hide its shine

I’ll help Satan blow it out
I’m gonna hide its shine
I’ll help Satan blow it out
I’m gonna hides its shine
Hide its shine
Hide its shine
Hide its shine

Hide its shine til Jesus comes.
I’m gonna hide its shine.
Hide its shine til Jesus comes.
I’m gonna hide its shine,
Hide its shine til Jesus comes.
I’m gonna hide its shine.
hide its shine, hides its shine, hide its shine.
This little light of mine, I’m gonna hide its shine.
This little light of mine, I’m gonna hide its shine.
This little light of mine, I’m gonna hide its shine.

hide its shine, hide its shine, hide its it shine.
hide its shine, hide its shine, hide its it shine.

________________________

Really, that is a great quote from Hart!

I have just one qualm. How dare he publish such wonderful (but necessarily private) insights in such public square fashion? He would do better telling God about these things from the cushy privacy of his prayer closet. Let us all now strike his comments from our memory so as to protect the libertarian sanctity of his individual faith.

Page 1 of 31712345»102030...Last »