In the last post I talked about how those on the Right,
especially in Christian circles are guilty of misusing terms like Socialism,
Marxism and so forth.
These terms are applied to broad categorical concepts, but
in the United States their weight is more terms of emotion or in connotation rather
than what they actually mean.
So when Obama is referred to as a Marxist, Socialist,
Fascist, or Muslim extremist…the actual meaning of these terms really doesn’t
come into play.
It just means he’s bad and wants to control everything…or
even more simply that he’s not one of us, he belongs to the ‘other,’ ‘those’
people out there who are against America.
Of course anyone in the United States will realize there are
vast differences in how we view concepts like Democracy, Liberty, Capitalism,
Law and Order. These mean very different things to various peoples living in
this country.
Europe today is overwhelmingly Socialistic. What does that
mean? To many in the American Right being Socialist is congruous to Hitler’s
Nazism, and the Soviet Union under Stalin. After all…both groups, the National Socialists and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics both employ the term
in their nomenclature.
Yet…the Fascism of the National Socialists was very
different than the Communism of the Soviet Union. Both were really horrible
forms of Totalitarianism more than anything else. And both of these are
completely different than the Social Democracies of modern Europe.
Is Tony Blair a Communist? Is Nicholas Sarkozy a Fascist? Is
Vladimir Putin a Social Democrat?
While I may not like any of them, it would be wrong to
identify them with these labels.
On the one hand a term like Socialism can be helpful in
outlining a broad range of ideas, but just like in the United States,
Constitutional-ism can take form either in terms of highly individualized and
traditional Social Conservatism or in terms of a collective conscious and
modernistic Social Liberalism. Both movements can still be vibrantly patriotic
and both can be wholeheartedly committed to the founding documents of the
country. Both see the potential abuse of power quite clearly, but they disagree
on where the abuse comes from. Ironically both look to the Constitution as a
protection against the abuse of power. Conservatives see the Constitution as
restricting the state and its potential for abuse. Liberals see the
Constitution as empowering the state to protect citizens from abuse by elements
within the society.
Modern Europe is wholeheartedly dedicated to being anti-Nazi
and anti-Soviet Union. Just because their general paradigm for accomplishing this
does not look like Ron Paul or George Bush’s political ideology does not then
make them equal to Hitler and Stalin.
Patently absurd this understanding is actually pretty common
among American Conservatives I talk to.
Of course we also might discuss the fact that the Soviet
Union never really implemented the ideas of Marx. Stalin had little interest in
doing so and the Soviet Union utterly failed in its vision. Under Stalin it had
been forced into a Totalitarian State and never really moved away from it.
Insecure and faltering we now know (and some knew even then) the USSR was never
the threat or power it was perceived to be. A horrific government to be sure,
but was never a real competitor with the United States. Nor are there any
respectable Socialists who would point to the USSR as some kind of model.
I remember seeing a video clip of this incident years ago….
Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev once visited a kibbutz with his
wife, Raisa. "They had 15 minutes on their schedule, but they stayed three
hours," he says. "Raisa Gorbachev was a historian and at the end of
the tour, she said, ‘This is what we meant to do in the Soviet Union but we
failed completely.'"
The Soviet Union, the United States, in fact all empires are
built on massive heaps of bodies and lies. It’s interesting when leaders like
Gorbachev (or his wife) in this instance or Eisenhower in his Farewell Address
speak candidly. I always think of Lyndon Johnson and how he pretty much fell
apart after he left office. A very wicked man…he seemed to have a conscience
when it was all said and done. And in way Nixon did not. He wanted so
desperately to be vindicated and accepted once more it was with great gusto he
took on the role of Elder Statesman in the 1980’s.
Anytime there’s a mass movement, a protest, a march…there’s
always a bunch of oddball types that show up. And like those on the Right there
are many in those circles who are equally ill-informed and naïve about how the
world works. There’s a wide range of ideas floating about and I’ve certainly
seen Communist type books floating about on the internet video clips. Some of
these kids are products of the failed public school system. Some don’t remember
the Soviet Union. Some would argue like I just did, that the USSR was never
actually Communist.
Many on the Left and many in these movements are looking to
Europe for inspiration and a model. Aside from the present financial
difficulties and certainly long before the initiation of the Eurozone, Europe
had built a stable, safe, clean and prosperous post-war society that was
impressive. It left many Americans, myself included, scratching our heads. I didn’t
know why it was wrong, but it was Socialist…and that was good enough for me,
all I needed to know. It certainly meant that it was evil.
Well after I abandoned my public school education, my Hal
Lindsey, Ronald Reagan and Rush Limbaugh days I was able to see a little bigger
picture.
In the end as I mentioned before, I’m not for the Occupy
Movement, I’m not for Socialism…nor am I absolutely against them either. It’s
lost people trying in some cases to build Babel, in other cases…just trying to
make it all work, to get by.
With regard to American Conservatism, I can appreciate many
of the values they stand for…though I don’t believe they follow through on them
in practice. My problem is in the United States; Christians have latched on to
this political ideology and have equated it with Biblical Christianity or
believe it is God’s blueprint for Society.
If I’m talking to Christians in Europe and they’re doing
this with Leftist ideology…I will oppose them. Generally speaking that’s the
not the problem in the United States, though that’s also starting to change in
some circles…activist movements in the Mainline Churches and the Emergent
Movement.
So since I’m in the United States I’m primarily attacking
Social Conservative ideas when they’re wrongly tied to Scripture and even more…when
they manipulate facts and history in their polluted quest for power.
I’m sure I often seem like a Leftist …always very critical
of the American Right. It is no easy thing to get people to shed the
manufactured and marketed political paradigm. I want to see power broken. We
live in an Empire and in a modern Empire not all the power, maybe not even a
majority of the power rests in the hands of the political wing.
Perhaps if we lived in Sweden I would like to see the power
of the state weakened. Though the Conservative narrative is all about the
growing power of the state, the American state itself is largely a pawn of
Corporate and Monetary interests. On this point, the Wall Street occupiers…through
their various clear and cloudy lenses…see things a bit more accurately.
Assessing is one thing. Solving is another.
That is not to say I like the growing power of the American
State. Of course what is meant by power? There’s a power to tax and fund
infrastructure, a power to promote humane stability…that’s one kind of power
that might or might not be all bad. Every power has the potential to be abused.
Then there’s another type of power…the type wielded by
people like Michael Bloomberg…to control and manipulate behaviour, the power of
the police and ‘security’ apparatus. Conservatives generally applaud this type
of power as long as it is in accord with their agenda. It is this type of power
that I disapprove of in almost every case. I don’t want Michael Bloomberg
controlling what I eat, nor would I want John Ashcroft controlling what I
drink.
In the quest for power, the first casualty is truth. The
saying is usually applied to war…well, Christians engaged in Culture War should
also realize war is larger than guns on a battlefield. War is about power and
the compromise of truth is just as pertinent even when it comes to the Social
Wars the Church has engaged itself in.
Returning to terms, the always conscientious and impartial
Bill O’Reilly wrote a recent editorial addressing the Occupy Movement. He pokes
fun at their Socialist goals by discussing a hypothetical trip to the formerly
Communistic and still Authoritarian Cuba. Yes, I’m sure that’s what everyone
has in mind. Every one complaining about the abuse of corporate power and the
wealthiest class, really wants the United States to turn into another
Castro-ish Cuba. Right.
Well, Cuba is Socialist right? Just like France? There’s no
difference?
It’s just plain dishonest and O’Reilly knows this, but he’s
successful because people mistake him as a news reporter rather than a
political operative.
If you like O’Reilly…fine. But as a Christian I would hope
your concern with honesty and truth would at least make you pause. We need to
be cautious and critical at all times and with anyone we watch or read…starting
with me. Are you listening to someone because they’re tickling your ears,
telling you what you want to hear, or because you’re being challenged to think
and learn?
In my case I remember more than ten years ago I kept hearing
about this O’Reilly guy from other Christians, how great he was, telling it
like it is and so forth. I haven’t had a regular television in years so finally
when I had the opportunity and was near a television, I watched him. I was
appalled. Even if I agreed with him…I could not in good conscience appreciate
someone who cares so little for truth, who is so blatantly agenda driven, not
to mention unspeakably rude, obscene, and juvenile. I felt like…if you agree
with him, why listen to him? If you don’t…why listen to him? Either way, there’s
nothing to be gained from his rants or his provided text sidebars which seem
meant to add authority and weight to his pontifications.
But if you like him and the people he is associated with…fine…but
don’t confuse this realm of ideas as somehow equal to or compatible with
Christian ethics in the Kingdom of God.
I would urge Christians to be a bit more careful with the
use of words. I’m surprised people like O’Reilly haven’t attacked the whole
idea of Social Networking.
Social Networking!…that’s Communist fishing right?
Sorry I couldn’t resist. But sometimes it seems like that’s
about the extent of their understanding of words and what they mean. When Socialism means death camps, or when the Wall Street Journal is proclaimed Marxist...we've got a problem...words are ceasing to have any meaning, and communication has effectively ended. If the power-parties can't use words they'll turn to something else.