Tag Archives: Oscar Jaszi

Socialism is a Denial of the Reality of Human Nature

Socialism is a Denial of the Reality of Human Nature –“Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps”  -Karl Marx

by Bill Lockwood

Socialism is an anti-God philosophy which is born and incubated in the atheistic laboratory. How is this the case? The philosophy of socialism is a sub-category of the world-view of Materialism. At the heart of the system is the basic premise that the behavior of man is shaped solely by the economic system. All factors determining human action have a materialistic base, per Socialism.

Vergilius Ferm, in his Encyclopedia of Religion, explains this gross error of socialism. “American socialism is heir to the tradition of materialism and atheism. It relies on the growth of automatic perfection, not indeed by virtue of the given natural faculties of man, but as the product of causally inevitable economic changes. The result is parallel to that of the liberal utopia, a self-contained world of man, individualistic here, collectivist there, and redeemed from evil, once and for all, by the economic process, much as this requires men conscious of their opportunity. This is an overtly anti-Christian doctrine.”

Again, Oscar Jaszi, the famed Hungarian social scientist and politician, noted that socialists insist that the “immorality of the established order is traceable NOT to the …nature of man, but to ‘corrupt institutions.’”  Therefore, socialism always seeks to transform the institutions of society because they are somehow “unjust.”

Socialistic Societies Unravel

Consider the fact that, in order to improve human behavior, God has “built into the system” negative repercussions for poor choices, just as in the natural sphere. If I jumped off a two-story building, I am going to suffer. People do not voluntarily behave that way unless they are mentally disabled. Negative consequences curtail my behavior.

So also in the economic field. My failure to labor results in hunger. That pain eventually drives me to be productive. This might be called God’s Corrective Mechanism. It is natural. “If a man does not work [refusing in the context] neither let him eat.” In the end, improvement of society as a whole is accomplished by improving behavior at a personal level.

FAILURE is a teacher in all realms of life. It forms a corrective that impels me to make adjustments in my performance in sports, in my production at work or at school. If I refuse to study in school, my lack should result in the same outcome: failure. That is the built-in pain producer that causes me to improve.

Socialism, on the other hand, takes this corrective mechanism (failure, pain, etc.) and artificially transfers this to others by force of government, be it school or in the civic arena. The polarities are reversed and misguided people who make poor choices are robbed of this corrective mechanism. No one is impelled to correct or adjust their behavior. Instead the “pain” of poor choices is placed upon the working class which is financing failure. Government fiat is responsible for this while poor choices continue to mushroom.

The Working Middle Class today is paying for (carrying the load of punishment) for HEALTH CARE for others. I am being forced by government to pony up for my neighbor’s health care. All natural incentives to live a healthier life (high costs of Health Care) has been removed from my neighbor’s back and saddled on mine. Very little incentive remains to avoid a dissipated life of alcohol, drugs, tobacco, etc. The pain has actually become mine and makes me less inclined to be productive.

I am being forced by government to pay for the HOUSING of low-income individuals. All incentives for those persons to stay in school, get a good job, and persevere are effectually removed. The burden and natural incentive to improve behavior has been artificially moved to me. But I don’t need those incentives, I am already working three jobs. Their lives continue to be impoverished because they have little incentive outside of personal pride to improve.

For that matter I am paying for the EDUCATION of other families’ children. I may have already sent my children through the educational system, but now I am paying for my neighbor’s children to receive an education. Thereby, the incentive for my neighbor not to have as many children is removed. This is exactly why middle class families are having less children and lower classes produce more. Society is thereby unraveling, but guaranteeing votes for the Democratic Party.

FOOD STAMP distribution has reached an all-time high. No accident under President Obama. These are doled out regardless of whether or not a person works or even cares to. This disgrace has reached such astronomical proportions that all the amenities of a comfortable life are now enjoyed by those in poverty: cell phones, televisions, and automobiles.

“My Baby-Daddy”

If one supposes this to be mere philosophizing about nonrealistic possibilities, I invite them to visit their local school. Single teenage girls are producing children at an alarming rate. They even talk about it as if one was visiting a breeding farm for animals—“My ‘baby-daddy’.” No fathers—just “baby-daddies.” Our culture is exploding with fatherless children and the teenage mothers have little idea that it actually COSTS something—quite a bit of something—to birth a child. Why are they so ignorant? Once again, our government has FORCED the middle-class worker to absorb the costs, those prohibitive repercussions.

None of this is to say that one’s duty is not to assist the poor. But that remains, as it should always have been, under private practice or church contribution, never government. We now have a huge under-belly in society that work little, live licentiously, produce babies, and continually make poor choices in life. Natural negative consequences that would impel them to make better life choices have been shifted by government to the middle-class.  Soon enough, it too will vanish in this false Utopia that refuses to recognize the realities of human nature.

Back to Homepage

Bill Lockwood: Socialism is Slavery

SOCIALISM IS SLAVERY- “It is the mainspring of socialism as well. Not only do these superior beings need to recognize the equality of all men, having been created by God, but to count others better than themselves (Philippians 2:1-4).”

by Bill Lockwood

Socialism begins with the basic tenet that some people are superior to others and should therefore manage the activities of the lesser. All men are created equal but some of us are more equal than others. It is a dictatorship of the elite who are required by the very nature of things to govern the lives of others.

Oscar Jaszi, the famed Hungarian socialist, explained socialism as: (1) A condemnation of the existing political and social order; (2) Advocacy of a new order; (3) A belief that this ideal is realizable; (4) A conviction that the immorality of the established order is traceable not to a fixed world order or to the unchanging nature of man but to corrupt institutions; (5) A program of action leading to the ideal through a fundamental remolding of human nature or of institutions or both; and (6) A revolutionary will to carry out this program.

Max Eastman, in his 1962 book Reflections on the Failure of Socialism, mused about the years he wasted in the doctrine of Socialism. Referring to socialism as a “Marxian religion” he emphasized that the real issue is “the usurpation of power” and that the “tyrant has no honest instinct for the liberties of man.”

The common denominator of all socialist theories, be they fascism, communism, Nazism, environmental paganism, economic theories championed by humanism—or whatever, is the following: “… that society can be made more free and equal, and incidentally more orderly and prosperous, by a state apparatus which takes charge of the economy, and runs it according to a plan.” Bottom Line: some people consider themselves to be naturally endowed to govern the rest of us.

Slavery

This is why Socialism is in reality another system of slavery. Socialism is a theory of government which requires the strong arm of the state to re-distribute private resources according to its plan. As an institution slavery begins with exactly the same assumption, both in the ancient and modern world. Some people are “more equal” than others.

Thomas Edwards, in his classic commentary on the biblical book of 1 Corinthians (p. 182), explained slavery on these terms while discussing the apostles’ remarks in chapter 7:11-24: “Slavery was an institution that sprang from other fundamental ideas—namely, the superiority of men over women; the religious pre-eminence of Jew over Gentile; the Greek consciousness of creative political genius; so that in discussing the question of slavery, the apostle [Paul] not only arbitrates between master and slave, but addresses himself to the antagonisms most deeply seated in the religious, political, and social condition of the time.”

It is THIS that Christianity alters—the view of mankind.  “All men are created equal” is a Christian axiom. The fact that biblical principles reconstruct one’s view of humankind from the ground up also explains why Christianity did never create firebrands of people to march in the streets demanding the overthrow of the social order, but instead operates over a period of time as leaven on a society.

As Edwards put it, “The distinction between master and slave ceases at the door of the church. But Christianity abolishes slavery by assimilating and sanctifying the relation of master and servant in its inmost nature. While it refuses to wield the sword and destroy civil institutions by violence, it so transforms their ruling ideas that those institutions become what they never were before.”

For instance, Christ bestows on the most degraded and despised slave who is a believer, spiritual endowments that cannot fail to inspire him with a consciousness of freedom. He ceases to be a slave by the very fact of knowing that in the sight of God he is free, and his service ceases to be a bondage because it is now a willing obedience to Christ.

See the slow but constant growing influence of these principles in the early ages of the church. Christians began “manumitting slaves” at Easter; then later on the Lord’s Day; at last they were freed on a daily basis. In the law Constantine forbade the owner of slaves to break up slave families; later came the sentiment that led rich men to consider the education and manumission of slaves an act of piety; finally, one witnesses the election of slaves to offices of the church, such as Calixtus, once an indentured servant, who became a bishop of Rome in 3d century.

Warped View of Mankind

Both slavery and socialism begin with a warped view of mankind, namely, that some people are more sufficient to manage the lives and activities of others. In reality, socialism is another face of slavery. This also demonstrates why the environmentalists continue to tend towards the socialistic Democratic Party.

In the following quotes, centered chiefly around the doctrines of environmentalism, one finds recommendations for massive population control, eugenics, and euthanasia. All of these require an elitist disposition. These geniuses are clearly positioning themselves to be the caretakers of ‘we the people.’

David Graber, once a biologist with the National Park Service, declared that “a particular species of a free-flowing river is of ‘more value’ to me than another human body, or a billion of them. Until such time as Homo Sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.”

The late Jacques Cousteau was quoted in the UNESCO Courier in November 1991 and again in November 1994 as saying, “The United Nation’s goal is to reduce population selectively by encouraging abortion, forced sterilization, and control of human reproduction, and regards two-thirds of the human population as excess baggage, with 350,000 people to be eliminated per day.” It’s terrible to have to say this. World population must be stabilized and to do that we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. This is so horrible to contemplate that we shouldn’t even say it. ” But say it he did.

Barbara Marx Hubbard, former Democratic vice-presidential candidate, prominent futurist and occult leader, in her The Book of Co-Creation, (self-published, 1980, Part III, p. p. 59), says, “The present vast overpopulation, now far beyond the world carrying capacity, cannot be answered by future reductions in the birth rate due to contraception, sterilization and abortion, but must be met in the present by the reduction of numbers presently existing. This must be done by whatever means necessary.”

Barack Obama’s top science advisor, John P. Holdren, opined that “A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men. “The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.”

Quotations like these are endless. They demonstrate that the very mindset which produces slavery throughout history and around the world– the supposed superiority that too many nurture in their own minds when they compare themselves to others–is alive and prevalent today. It is the mainspring of socialism as well. Not only do these superior beings need to recognize the equality of all men, having been created by God, but to count others better than themselves (Philippians 2:1-4).

Back to Homepage

 

Why the Socialism of the Democratic Party is Evil

Why the Socialism of the Democratic Party is Evil

by Bill Lockwood

Socialism is a competing view of human nature than that offered by the Bible. At the heart of a socialistic worldview is the basic premise that the nature of man is shaped by the economic system. It is only because of this particular view of human nature that socialism includes a theory of the nature and function of government which redistributes wealth. In other words, the only way to change human behavior is through forcible redistribution of resources. This is exactly what Bernie Sanders, the senator from Vermont, asserted in the Saturday night Democratic debate when he said that Climate Change is the biggest “security threat” to the United States.

On Sunday, CBS News’ John Dickerson followed up the Saturday debate with Sanders on “Face the Nation,” which Dickerson hosts. Dickerson asked whether or not Sanders had changed his mind on the assessment that Climate Change was the biggest “security threat” in light of the Muslim terrorist attacks in Paris. Socialist Sanders responded, “If we are going to see an increase in drought, flood and extreme weather disturbances as a result of climate change, what that means is that people all over the world are going to be fighting over limited natural resources.” “If there is not enough water, if there is not enough land to grow your crops, then you’re going to see migrations of people fighting over land that will sustain them, and that will lead to international conflicts.”

Dickerson interjected, “But how does drought connect with attacks by [the Islamic State] in the middle of Paris?” Sanders continued, “When you have drought, when people can’t grow their crops, they’re going to migrate into cities, and when people migrate into cities and they don’t have jobs, there’s going to be a lot more instability, a lot more unemployment and people will be subject to the types of propaganda that al-Qaeda and ISIS are using right now. So where you have discontent, where you have instability, that’s where problems arise, and certainly, without a doubt, climate change will lead to that.”

Overtly Anti-Christian

The bloody Muslim terrorist attacks in Paris are aided and abetted by this false and ignorant view of human nature espoused by socialism and voiced by Bernie Sanders. It refuses common sense and insists, even before the smoke in Paris has dissipated, that people are not as much shaped by what they believe—the Koran or any other set of beliefs—but by economics. Sanders would have us to believe that the poverty of the attackers, not the teaching of the Koran, is the cause. This is mass BRAINWASHING on a Hitlerian scale that has emanated from the academy and has engulfed the entire Democratic Party. Sadly, it will continue to wreak a horrific vengeance upon society as long as liberalism fails to grasp the basics of human nature.

Vergilius Ferm, in his Encyclopedia of Religion, explains this gross error of socialism. “American socialism is heir to the tradition of materialism and atheism. It relies on the growth of automatic perfection, not indeed by virtue of the given natural faculties of man, but as the product of causally inevitable economic changes. The result is parallel to that of the liberal utopia, a self-contained world of man, individualistic here, collectivist there, and redeemed from evil, once and for all, by the economic process, much as this requires men conscious of their opportunity. This is an overtly anti-Christian doctrine.”

Oscar Jaszi, the famed Hungarian social scientist and politician, noted that socialists insist that the “immorality of the established order is traceable NOT to the …nature of man, but to ‘corrupt institutions.’”  Therefore, socialism always seeks to transform the institutions of society because they are somehow “unjust.” Since socialism teaches that the nature of man is shaped by the economic system, if one changes the economic system from private ownership to the collective state ownership, the nature of man will be changed—for the better per the Democratic Party.

The Reality of Human Nature

The founders of America, with one voice, repudiated the socialistic fantasy regarding human nature. Man is a free moral agent which is independent of his economic status. Man is sinful by practice (Rom. 3:23) which is why unbridled power, not poverty, was considered the greatest enemy to freedom. Human experience shows that poverty does not necessarily breed bad behavior nor does an equality of goods among citizens foster a better society. Moral sensitivity is imbedded in the heart of poor and rich alike and has nothing whatsoever to do with our wealth or lack thereof. Men are still moved by ideals, good or bad.

One man who had discarded this truth only to find it again was American editor and journalist Max Eastman. After experimenting with socialistic theories, even traveling to the Soviet Union to learn from the masters at the Kremlin, he repudiated it. In his Reflections on the Failure of Socialism, he tells us why socialism is always a failure. “It seemed perfectly clear, once the question was boldly put, that if the socialist hypothesis were valid in general, some tiny shred of the benefits promised by it would have appeared when the Russian capitalists were expropriated and production taken over by the state, no matter how untoward the circumstances. By that time everything in Russia was worse from the standpoint of socialist ideals that it had been under the regime of the Tsar.  I did not need any additional experiments such as that of Nazi Germany, or in England, to the obvious drift in other countries, to convince me.  I was sure than the whole idea of extending freedom, or justice, or equality, or any other civilized value, to the lower classes through common ownership of the means of production was a delusive dream, a bubble that had taken over a century to burst.”

As Eastman would say, how many more failed experiments do we need of socialistic control before we will repudiate it? Apparently, even blood in the streets of Paris does not faze the socialists. They must preach their foolish theory. The Barack Obama’s and Bernie Sanders of the world will keep on messing around with their academic ivory-tower falsehoods to the erosion of our safety and loss of our freedom.

Back to Homepage