It is likely that the U.S. will never recover from the agenda of the Obama administration. Most evangelical believers feared what might come of his being elected, but the focus was most likely on judicial appointments, foreign policy, taxes, moral issues such as abortion, euthanasia, and gay rights. I could list pages more of things people expected would happen, but how many expected that in the first quarter of his term an American President would do what the Castro, Chavez, Hitler, and the entire politburo of the Soviet Union during the Cold War couldn't do? Obama has completed what FDR started and has moved us from a capitalist nation to a socialist state.
To some, this will sound extreme and alarmist, but as with almost everything else, government changes take a little while to take full affect. If you don't see it now, just wait.
In a misguided effort to force other people to be more compassionate and moral, our people have elected to serve tyranny rather than freedom. (and I haven't even read Levin's book yet). If we are suspicious of greedy CEO's of large companies that oppress their people, what makes us think that government will be more righteous? If we are afraid of monopolies like Microsoft or AT&T because they keep people from having a choice, what makes us think that a government monopoly will be any different?
Even some Evangelicals have swallowed the cool-aid by expecting government to act like the church. So they preach justice and define it in terms of welfare and wealth distribution. While it is true that the church described in the New Testament more resembled a socialist/communal society with everyone sharing what they had and giving to support the needy, they did so with a redeemed heart led by the Holy Spirit. They were the church, not the government. The Kingdom of God isn't a democracy, it's a Theocracy. God is our benevolent dictator.
But by confusing the two, we have confused self-interest with selfishness and traded individual liberty to become a part of the masses to be led by the cultural elite. The result is that we are de-humanizing humanity. The masses aren't intelligent enough to make wise decisions, and therefore must be herded like animals, controlled for their own good.
In de-humanizing humanity, we are removing all motivation to produce and to achieve. When all achievement is rewarded by the confiscation of the benefits and it's redistribution to those who have not earned, or have decided not to participate in the work, then the achievers will not achieve, or look somewhere else to ply their talents.
Capitalism, on the other hand considers that all men are created equal, which means they are created deserving equal rights even if they do not have equal talent. Every person has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and when you read happiness, in founder-speak read "money" or "property." No one has the right to money, but the pursuit of money. Every person has the right to the opportunity to provide for themselves. They do not have the right to have others provide for them.
At this point, compassion will declare the names of those who are unable to work, but these relatively few examples become the rationale to keep millions more from the motivation that would make them productive members of society. How compassionate is that? The principles of capitalism actually grow from great faith in the abilities of each individual.
But all is not lost. More to come.
Phil
