Episode 1: Year: AD 2036 Late September
"All right class: that will do for math today." The three students who stood at the blackboard now walked back to their seats while the teacher continued talking. "I can tell from the shadow on our floor sundial it is almost time for dismissal." The students signaled their approval at this. "We don't have time for history right now (Again, sounds of approval.) but in review, who can recall what we talked about in our last lesson."
One student near the back offered: "We were discussing the last days of the United States of America, before the Great Darkness."
"But it is forbidden to talk about the Great Darkness!" Another student, a girl piped up.
The teacher shook his head. "I know it is forbidden and we will respect that law. However, there are many people who say the USA fell because of the Great Darkness. This is incorrect. I am going to show it fell before these events began, and it may have precipitated the descent." He smiled. "And I am going to teach this part of the history in narrative form!"
"What?" A younger student said.
"I am going to tell you the story, a true one, and we will discuss its relationship to the events of that era. OK? We can even ask some hypothetical, 'What would you have done' types of questions." Heads were nodding all over. "This might be a lot of fun." He thought to himself.
Just then the bell started ringing. It was not actually a bell. More like a piece of iron pipe that one of the townspeople was hitting with a mallet. This was the signal for school to end. The students were needed for chores. All twenty of them jumped up and started chattering at once as they filed through the opening that served as a door.
The teacher watched his charges leave with a slight smile on his face. He admired them to no end. Exceptional students were they every one. His depth of feeling rested more than in the mere fact of academic accomplishments. He loved them too. Oh, they could be exasperating! (They were teenagers.) All the same, he felt the same kind of joy any diligent parent would feel. He sighed deeply and started coughing. The fit lasted only a few seconds but it was enough to leave him slightly light-headed. In a moment the dizziness passed and he bent over to soak a rag in the small bucket of water on the floor near the board. There were no erasers, and the board had to be washed several times a day. It was impossible to get completely clean. The best he could do is reduce the writing into swirls of yellow streaks.
Finishing that task, he closed the shutters on the windows and wiped the students' desks down. He took his time performing this. There was a lot going on in his mind and he needed to calm it down a little. "You've only got so much time left." He told himself. If anything drastic were to happen then no one would ever know. It really wasn't much of a big secret, but he felt compelled to tell the story one time, even if no one would care in this new age. The old had passed away for sure. But he determined these students would know some small part of what once was.
From habit he reached into his pocket and pulled out a photograph. It was very old and creased. Five people could be seen in the fore while others were milling about behind. In the center was a much younger version of himself with his arm around another guy who was smiling broadly. They were in the midst of a celebration. Two women, also smiling were standing on either side of them. The woman next to him had one hand on his shoulder and the other on the shoulder of a blond-haired boy. The boys head was tilted slightly to one side as he looked up at the others.
He stared at the photo and felt the pain of remembrance while blinking away tears. Then, the picture was returned to the safekeeping of his pocket. Stepping outside he slid the gray sheet of plywood across the opening. After securely fastening it in place he turned toward his one-room abode, walking briskly for someone of his age and showing only a faint limp.
Friday, August 27, 2010
Thursday, August 12, 2010
God Economics: Robin Hood verses King Solomon
We've all heard the story of Robin Hood. He's the guy who lived with his merry men in Sherwood Forest and generally made life miserable for the evil Sheriff of Nottingham. His credo was to 'steal from the rich and give to the poor.'
There is no question this is the political model for many of our representatives today. Every kind of tax policy and regulation they have enacted in recent months shows their contempt for our rich and the desire to make them poor; along with everyone else - except government employees.
But should this be the correct model? Is there a better one? Of course there is. Steal from no one. Let them keep their money and use it as they see fit. If they want to give some to the less fortunate, fine! This is a simplistic idea and to the left-leaning crowd does not deserve merit. They would say the free market capitalists are insensitive to the needs of others. I disagree. I am going to compare our present model with one that is more effective and has been around for more than 3,000 years.
We'll start with Robin Hood. The best illustration I have seen of his method is this: I and a friend are walking down the street. A guy comes up and asks my friend for some money. He reaches into his pocket and gives him a $10 bill. That is benevolence, or charity.
If we modify that scenario a little the error is seen. Suppose the same thing happens, except my friend reaches into my pocket, pulls out one of my $10 bills to give to the man. That is stealing. It would be even worse if I objected to my friend pawing at my wallet and he pulled out a gun and took my money by force. I may reconsider believing him to be a friend. But wait! Doesn't he have a good motive? It really doesn't matter, does it? His motive has become suspect because of his actions.
This is a case of 'the end justifies the means.' If that were true why should not everyone steal as much as possible? The end result is evil and anarchy. Let's take a closer look at Robin Hood. A good friend recently reminded me that he was not stealing in order to give to the poor. He was stealing. Period. Giving to the poor is a ruse he uses to make people think he is somehow on their side. It is a smoke screen for his criminal activity. Further, the ones he gives to become dependent on his false benevolence and he has to keep stealing in order to maintain the ruse. This encourages his merry men to do the same and so the environment for criminal activity permeates all. They will rationalize their wrong doing in several ways. For instance they might say, "Well, the rich are greedy!" "They have an abundance so what I take is small potatoes to them." "Their insurance will pay for it." and so on.
Solomon said this about such people in Proverbs 6:30-31: "Men do not despise a thief if he steals to satisfy his hunger when he is starving. Yet if he is caught, he must pay sevenfold, though it costs him all the wealth of his house." While Robin Hood may cut a dashing figure in mythology and movies for our entertainment, at bottom he was not noble at all. He was a petty thief with delusions of grandeur.
Now let's take a look at a better model. Leviticus 19 says: "...When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap to the very corners of your field, nor shall you gather the gleanings of your harvest. Nor shall you glean your vineyard, nor shall you gather the fallen fruit of your vineyard: you shall leave them for the needy and for the stranger...." (9,10) At first glance some would say this is the same thing as Robin Hood, isn't it? Not even. There are a couple of significant differences. Notice there is no penalty meted on non-participants. No one takes the fruit of their labor by force. This is a voluntary service performed on behalf of the poor. Also, the actual work is done by those in need. If they want to eat they go out into the fields in the same way the owners had to. Nothing is simply given to them. They do not necessarily become dependent. They do not have to commit a crime in order to eat. At the same time skills are being learned. A good view of the rich is maintained. With this model everybody wins. And who administrates this? No one. It is done at the personal level.
For many years our legislators have been stealing from us under the smoke screen of "Helping the ______(Insert designation here)". They are not actually interested in helping. The real purpose is to create dependency. On them. That way they can continue in power. The fact is this hinders our economic opportunities and serves to create tension between honest hard working individuals and a government with dubious intent. In order for the ruse to continue the government must steal more and more lest it run out of money and their dependents rebel.
The day of reckoning is here. The schemes they have proposed have done little to help and they have bankrupted our country. It's time for a big change. We have the opportunity to un-elect a number of delusional thieves and replace them with rational leaders who believe in the limited role of government and the rule of law. The time is now.
There is no question this is the political model for many of our representatives today. Every kind of tax policy and regulation they have enacted in recent months shows their contempt for our rich and the desire to make them poor; along with everyone else - except government employees.
But should this be the correct model? Is there a better one? Of course there is. Steal from no one. Let them keep their money and use it as they see fit. If they want to give some to the less fortunate, fine! This is a simplistic idea and to the left-leaning crowd does not deserve merit. They would say the free market capitalists are insensitive to the needs of others. I disagree. I am going to compare our present model with one that is more effective and has been around for more than 3,000 years.
We'll start with Robin Hood. The best illustration I have seen of his method is this: I and a friend are walking down the street. A guy comes up and asks my friend for some money. He reaches into his pocket and gives him a $10 bill. That is benevolence, or charity.
If we modify that scenario a little the error is seen. Suppose the same thing happens, except my friend reaches into my pocket, pulls out one of my $10 bills to give to the man. That is stealing. It would be even worse if I objected to my friend pawing at my wallet and he pulled out a gun and took my money by force. I may reconsider believing him to be a friend. But wait! Doesn't he have a good motive? It really doesn't matter, does it? His motive has become suspect because of his actions.
This is a case of 'the end justifies the means.' If that were true why should not everyone steal as much as possible? The end result is evil and anarchy. Let's take a closer look at Robin Hood. A good friend recently reminded me that he was not stealing in order to give to the poor. He was stealing. Period. Giving to the poor is a ruse he uses to make people think he is somehow on their side. It is a smoke screen for his criminal activity. Further, the ones he gives to become dependent on his false benevolence and he has to keep stealing in order to maintain the ruse. This encourages his merry men to do the same and so the environment for criminal activity permeates all. They will rationalize their wrong doing in several ways. For instance they might say, "Well, the rich are greedy!" "They have an abundance so what I take is small potatoes to them." "Their insurance will pay for it." and so on.
Solomon said this about such people in Proverbs 6:30-31: "Men do not despise a thief if he steals to satisfy his hunger when he is starving. Yet if he is caught, he must pay sevenfold, though it costs him all the wealth of his house." While Robin Hood may cut a dashing figure in mythology and movies for our entertainment, at bottom he was not noble at all. He was a petty thief with delusions of grandeur.
Now let's take a look at a better model. Leviticus 19 says: "...When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap to the very corners of your field, nor shall you gather the gleanings of your harvest. Nor shall you glean your vineyard, nor shall you gather the fallen fruit of your vineyard: you shall leave them for the needy and for the stranger...." (9,10) At first glance some would say this is the same thing as Robin Hood, isn't it? Not even. There are a couple of significant differences. Notice there is no penalty meted on non-participants. No one takes the fruit of their labor by force. This is a voluntary service performed on behalf of the poor. Also, the actual work is done by those in need. If they want to eat they go out into the fields in the same way the owners had to. Nothing is simply given to them. They do not necessarily become dependent. They do not have to commit a crime in order to eat. At the same time skills are being learned. A good view of the rich is maintained. With this model everybody wins. And who administrates this? No one. It is done at the personal level.
For many years our legislators have been stealing from us under the smoke screen of "Helping the ______(Insert designation here)". They are not actually interested in helping. The real purpose is to create dependency. On them. That way they can continue in power. The fact is this hinders our economic opportunities and serves to create tension between honest hard working individuals and a government with dubious intent. In order for the ruse to continue the government must steal more and more lest it run out of money and their dependents rebel.
The day of reckoning is here. The schemes they have proposed have done little to help and they have bankrupted our country. It's time for a big change. We have the opportunity to un-elect a number of delusional thieves and replace them with rational leaders who believe in the limited role of government and the rule of law. The time is now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)