Choose This Day Who You Will Serve October 25, 2012Posted by Dr. Robert Owens in Uncategorized.
Tags: Capitalism, democratic principles, Dr. Robert Owens, Free choice, free market capitalism, Obama’s agenda, Progressive agenda, Representative republic
1 comment so far
In our current confrontation with Radical Islam the battle lines are portrayed as those between a secular society, us and a religious society, them. I reject this portrayal as a betrayal of the faith of our Founders and of those patriotic Americans who still hold fast to Jesus as God and Savior, we too are a religious people.
America was founded as a Christian country. Anyone who denies that has not studied enough History or has been sadly misled. Columbus accentuated his desire to spread the Christian faith to his patrons the King and Queen of Spain and in his log. The first thing the English did upon landing at Jamestown was set up a cross to dedicate their endeavor to Jesus their Savior. Were these early explorers and colonists always true to their faith? Did they always operate under principles derived from God’s Word? Sadly they did not. However, to say that the Christian faith was not an integral part of their motivation and worldview is simply not true.
In the latter part of the twentieth century Progressive leaders pushing a collectivist agenda decided to declare us a pluralistic society. They sought to detach the heavily Bible influenced Constitution into the dustbin of History by substituting what they call a living constitution for the rock-solid one the Framers bequeathed us. Mr. Obama, the quintessential Progressive in his speech to the Muslims of Egypt, Turkey, and many places spices up his apology tours by asserting that America is not a Christian country. This statement of his belief and goal does not make it true.
All of these recent changes aside, most Americans still believe in God and the majority consider themselves Christians. As a Christian, an Historian, and a Political Scientist in response to numerous questions I would like to share my beliefs concerning government, economies, and the rights of man.
As far as a government goes the only Biblically correct one is that God is God and we are His people. He is the King and we are the sheep of His pasture. As concerning an economic system God’s economy knows no lack and is exceedingly abundantly provisioned by the owner of the cattle on a thousand hills.
This being true I do not believe that God mandates any type of human government or economic system as pre-ordained, sanctified, or holy. However, I do believe that humanity as God has created it does require certain governmental and economic conditions to develop and thrive as God intended.
God created us in His own image. He gave us the power to create and to choose. He gave us a mind open to learning and ever eager to improvise. He also gave us what I believe is the most crucial aspect of our make-up: our free will or the power to choose. We can choose to follow Him and do what He desires, or we can choose to follow the leadings not only of our thoughts but of our emotions also. In other words we can dwell within the Kingdom of God wherein He is our King and we are His people or we can choose to live in the Kingdom of man and become the subjects of either our own designs or of whoever manages to gain control of the physical world around us.
If God wanted slaves or robots He could have created slaves or robots. Instead He created us and gave us a mind to think and a will to choose because He wanted us to decide to love Him and follow Him freely without compulsion. Therefore I believe that since free thought and free choice are the foundation of man’s nature freedom is necessary if man is to live as God designed. This being the case I believe that any governmental or economic system that denies man’s freedom interferes with and attempts to supplant God’s plan, which is the definition of evil.
There are of course limits to freedom as expressed in the Ten Commandments. Beyond this we should be free to choose our own way. Will we follow God or will we follow man. Within these limits and building on the moral framework the Bible provides I believe that a republic based upon the commitment to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness using democratic principles is the governmental structure which most closely matches man’s God-given nature. I also believe that free market capitalism is the economic system which best allows man to develop and live as God intended. Conversely, when man rejects God and seeks to create his own utopia he builds some sort of centrally-planned command economy and the intrusive government needed to impose it upon others.
A free economy and the free government it requires allows the independent choices of many to produce the greatest prosperity for all as everyone seeks to do the best they can because they reap the rewards. In a socialist or any type of hybrid economy between capitalism and socialism bureaucrats make the decisions and stagnation is the inevitable result. As Gary North, a Christian economist expresses it, “The essence of democratic socialism is this re-written version of God’s commandment: ‘Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.’” Or as Winston Churchill observed, “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” And that is not life as God intended.
If we look at History it is an outworking of the initial fall of man. In the beginning God created the world including man and it was all good. Then at the dawn of our existence we choose to go our own way instead of following God. We chose to follow the siren song of “You shall be like God” and ever since we have attempted to create heaven on earth. All we have succeeded in doing is to open the gates of Hell instead. A case in point would be the age-old question, if God is good why is there evil in the world followed by the age-old answer God gave us free choice and we chose evil.
With the help and guidance of those who seek to play god themselves humanity has often been convinced to surrender their freedom for security, to bargain away their God-given nature and assume the subservient nature of slaves.
In America the purveyors of socialism cloak their designs in the language of populism. They loudly proclaim that they seek a fair deal for everyone, except of course for the people they intend to loot. They want fair elections as long as nothing is done to stop fraudulent voting. They want equality enforced by unequal treatment. In other words they seek to build the kingdom of man where they can be king.
We have a mind to think and the capacity to make a free choice. As the day of reckoning draws near all I can recommend is, think and choose. We can choose to follow the path of redistribution, class warfare, and collectivist dependency or we can choose to at least attempt a return to limited government, personal liberty, and economic freedom. Don’t be fooled by the progressive media and their obvious bias. To be free is God’s design. For us to be a slave to dependency is man’s.
One of America’s most beloved troubadours told us, “The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls and tenement halls” and one of those secular prophets he was referring to reminded us “You’re gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed You’re gonna have to serve somebody, Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord But you’re gonna have to serve somebody.”
Or as my favorite book says it, “And if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”
Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion. He is the Historian of the Future @ http://drrobertowens.com © 2012 Robert R. Owens firstname.lastname@example.org Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens
Why Does Affirmative Action End at the Gridiron? October 19, 2012Posted by Dr. Robert Owens in Uncategorized.
Tags: Affirmative Action, collectivist agenda, Dr. Robert Owens, equality of outcome, Obama agenda, Progressive agenda
add a comment
Have you ever pondered the fact that everyone being endowed with equal rights by our creator works out so naturally while the equality of outcome that our Progressive would-b-masters seek to impose is impossible to achieve without treating people differently? Have you ever noticed that whenever the government wishes to give anyone anything they have to first take it from someone else?
Since everyone obviously has different skills, talents, and ambitions people inevitably perform and produce at different levels. Therefore to make everyone end up in the same place it is necessary to hold some back and artificially advance others.
For example if we wanted to treat everyone equally with regard to taxes we would have a flat tax with no deductions as in everyone pays 10%. If you make one million dollars or one thousand dollars you pay 10%. That would be equal treatment before the law and in my opinion that would be fair. However in the Progressives version of a fair tax system designed to promote equality, people who earn different amounts are taxed at different rates. If you earn more you pay more. That may sound good to some, but how is it fair?
In education if equality was really the desired result everyone would be judged by the same standards for admission regardless of race, creed, color or any other mitigating factor. Everyone would take the same tests and everyone would be graded exactly the same with admission based upon the score. In the world of American Academia as administrated by the Progressives categories of people are judged by different standards and they call this fairness.
Look at the bewildering array of social programs that have been implemented to ensure equality and fairness in the Progressive utopia. From food stamps and free cell phones to state subsidized education in criminal justice for convicted felons, these ill-conceived and often abused programs turn the safety net into a hammock that beg the question Ayn Rand was known to ask, “At whose expense?” If someone gets free food, free education; free anything the question we should ask is, at whose expense? The next question should be, do those who are paying the freight for this pleasure cruise do so voluntarily or are they being coerced? If they are being coerced into paying for someone else’s benefits what makes this any different than theft?
It’s as if the Progressives have tried to change our original national motto from” E Pluribus Unum” to “Stand and Deliver” or have they changed our present national motto “In God We Trust” to “You Can’t Fight City Hall.” Or as if the new national anthem should be, “Happy Days Are Here Again – Unless You Work For a Living.”
One of the most often quoted and misquoted statements concerning History tells us, those who do not learn from History are doomed to repeat it and today we are seeing the fruits of this truism. The two great revolutions of the eighteenth century, the American and the French, were mirror images of each other in several important ways. The American Revolution made a declaration to the entire world that the rights they sought were endowed upon all men by their creator. The French in the Declaration of the Rights of Man placed government as the source of these rights. The American Revolution sought to rid themselves of an all-powerful government with a limited government so that individuals could be free to prosper on their own. The French sought to replace an all-powerful government based upon birth with an all-powerful government based on merit believing that where the former one wanted to maintain the status quo with elites on top while the latter one would promote equality with elites on top.
The American experiment created the freest, richest, most powerful country in the History of the world. In France after the Terror, after the Triumvirate, and after the Empire the people saw that they had merely replaced one elite group with another. Then the Kings came back.
In America today our federally controlled education has led to generations of people who have never learned History or Civics. Now the progressive Pied Pipers are leading the uninformed to exchange the equality of opportunity our Founders established for the equality of outcome Europe has chased after since the French Revolution. With a public not knowing enough to know the difference these bait and switch tactics seem to be working, and after one hundred years of a living constitution the Constitution is nearly dead.
We have one more election to stem the tide as we look for a chance to reverse the flow and return America to limited government, individual freedom, and economic opportunity. If we miss this opportunity we may soon experience the equality of mediocrity as we descend into the collectivist pit of self-immolation. This pit is typified by big government programs meant to redress some perceived inequality. Redressing inequality sounds good. The problem lies in the fact that to do so you need a big enough government to enforce the desired result, and governments are made up of fallible people who all have their own prejudices and desires.
James Madison, in Federalist 51 reflected that, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.” Men aren’t angels. Which is why he continued, “In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”
One program which serves as a fitting example of the impossibility of living a consistent life when trained, framed and constrained by the attempts to impose an artificial man-made, government enforced equality is Affirmative Action. Which some may argue has now reached the White House.
Why Does Affirmative Action End at the Gridiron?
Even the Colleges that are the most rapid in their interpretation and enforcement of Affirmative Action seem to forget these artificial standards when it comes to their sports teams. Have you ever wondered why that is so? Because they want the best players on the field no matter what the ratios of black, white, yellow, red, straight, gay or other.
Don’t fall for the siren song of something for nothing, for affirmative this, and equality that. Don’t let the perpetually re-elected hucksters fool you with their promise of a fair shot, a square deal, or of making someone else pay their fair share. When everything is put in one pot and it is supposed to be divided equally it always seems that those who do the dividing get the fairest share of all.
Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion. He is the Historian of the Future @ http://drrobertowens.com © 2012 Robert R. Owens email@example.com Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens
Without Hope You’re Hopeless October 12, 2012Posted by Dr. Robert Owens in Politics.
Tags: 2012 election, Classical Liberalism, Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Dr. Robert Owens
add a comment
Listening to the lies of the politicians as presented by the prattle of the biased it is easy to lose hope in a secular sense. My hope in an eternal sense is founded on the rock of an unshakable faith in Jesus, and so it cannot be shaken. However, in the secular resting, as it must upon the shifting sands of man in America today, hope as a measured commodity is all too often hopeless. Seeking for hope in current events, a diamond among the discards and a point of light in a sea of darkness, is seeking something positive among the gathering gloom of an empire in eclipse.
I don’t know about you, but I cannot focus on the negative trends of our current situation for long without at least contemplating depression and I don’t mean the economic kind. I am thankful I have a peace that passes all understanding and a hope that cannot be taken away, and I am also glad that I have a sense of History which gives me a context to frame the Now. For if all we have is the Now it can always be changed with the next headline, the next news bulletin, or the next press release. Having a historical context brings things into focus fitting the events of today into flow of time from yesterday to tomorrow.
Truth often becomes the victim of expediency. For what seems true at the moment may end up as the lie of the hour. Politicians bend truth like gravity bends light: the heavier the perceived need the greater the unperceived distortion. Lies can become so widely believed that truth is swallowed in truism. Lies become the accepted wisdom of professional pundits chattering endlessly, supporting that which ultimately must fall for those who seek to surf a tsunami into a safe harbor. The news is filled with half-truths and as my second favorite philosopher, Anonymous, once said, “Beware of half-truths, you may have gotten the wrong half.”
We live in a twilight time. Twilight by definition is a time when two sources of light pierce the gloom. It is that quivering moment when both the sun and the moon hold back the darkness. The darkness of confusion is dispelled by the brightness of the sun of truth, but it is disputed by refracted light of the moon of opinion masquerading as truth.
Casting about for something solid in the midst of the swirling fog of conflicting facts, shifting observations, and contradictory visions in the secular sense I must focus on one thing: the people. I trust the American people. I trust them to make the right choice when presented with unvarnished reality. I trust them to do what must be done to preserve the bequest of our forefathers for the inheritance of our posterity.
The Declaration of Independence was written to proclaim the righteousness of the actions of “One people” with the courage to declare to a world sold into bondage that our liberty was founded upon truth. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
We the People wrote the Constitution in order to perfect that which had been founded upon the truth. “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
It is to this one people, this “We the people” that I look for secular hope, political peace, and the eventual solution to our current cultural conundrum. The popular definition of a conundrum is a problem without a solution. However it also has another meaning: a riddle whose answer is or involves a pun. Since I am referring to the second meaning I will present the riddle, “How is liberalism the solution to the problem of liberalism?”
In our through-the-looking-glass world, politicians use actual truth to obscure the obvious truth. Congressman Joe Early (D-Mass) at a press conference to answer questions about the House Bank scandal said, “They gave me a book of checks. They didn’t ask for any deposits.” While I’m sure it is true he was given a book of checks, obviously one needs to make deposits if one is to honestly write checks. In this same manner the leaders of our free country promote socialism as the solution to the problems socialism has caused knowing that you cannot honestly write checks if you don’t make deposits. Capitalism makes the deposits and socialism wants to write the checks. As Churchill said “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
We are awash in polls. Every campaign and every major news source constantly trumpet polls many of which contradict each other. No matter what the polls say I believe that the American people still believe in freedom. I believe they still believe in the equality of opportunity and the opportunity of equality. We all aren’t the same. Each of us is born with a particular set of talents and each of us uses those talents in a certain way. It is my belief, that given the level playing field of individual liberty and economic freedom, the vast majority of Americans will work hard to earn what they deserve. This is my secular hope. Heaven on earth is not possible but given individual liberty and economic freedom inherently promised in the perfect union we the people sought to create we can at least avoid remaining in the hell of socialism the Progressives are currently foisting upon us, as Churchill also said “If you’re going through hell, keep going.”
Oh, by the way, the answer to the riddle is that Classical Liberalism promotes the general welfare by promoting the limitation of government and the liberty of the individual in order to better serve the whole. Welfare Liberalism erodes the general welfare by expanding the government at the expense of the individual in order to better serve the individual. Thus Classical Liberalism is the solution to the problems caused by Welfare Liberalism. And that’s the truth which brings me to one last Churchill quote for the day, “The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. Ignorance may deride it. But in the end, there it is.”
Hope and change may have convinced our fellow citizens to sell their birthright of freedom for the savory red stew of give me more; however, November is coming and things may change. At least we can hope. For without hope we are hopeless and we are a hopeful people.
Don’t be discouraged by the blather of the pontificating politicians or confused by the conflicting ruminations of the professional talkers. When all is said and done we can trust us. We the people will eventually come down on the side of truth, justice, and the American way.
Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion. He is the author of the History of the Future @ http://drrobertowens.com © 2012 Robert R. Owens. Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens You can contact Dr. Owens at firstname.lastname@example.org
Did He Do What Needed to be Done October 4, 2012Posted by Dr. Robert Owens in Politics.
Tags: 2012 1st presidential debate, Dr. Robert Owens, First debate, Obama loses debate, Romney wins debate
In last night’s first presidential debate of 2012 nothing had the dramatic impact of Ronald Reagan’s spontaneous and memorable quips, “There you go again!” when attacked by Jimmy Carter in 1980 and in 1984, when asked about his age by an obviously mature and experienced Walter Mondale, he replied naturally, “I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.” Nothing had the visual impact of a haggard looking Nixon with poor makeup next to the Hollywood good looks of John Kennedy. And neither politician made a mistake as bad as Ford forgetting that Eastern Europe was under Soviet domination.
Nothing as dramatic as in these game changing debates however, Mitt Romney did do what needed to be done. He came out swinging and he didn’t stop until the bell rang.
Immediately after the debate Neil Cavuto, in my opinion one of the best anchors on TV, called it a draw and quipped that draws always go to the champ, meaning that Obama came off with a TKO.
On the Networks usually devoted to advancing the agenda of the Democratic Party however it was different story. The Progressive media was wringing its hands over Mr. Obama’s lackluster performance. And a CNN poll conducted Wednesday night found that 75% of people thought Romney had won the debate. Even in California, the bluest of blue states the plurality of those watching thought Romney won. Most telling of all Chris Matthews, the MSNBC anchor who is famous for the thrill running up his leg when he listens to Obama said, “I don’t know what he was doing out there. He had his head down, he was enduring the debate rather than fighting it. Romney, on the other hand, came in with a campaign. He had a plan, he was going to dominate the time, he was going to be aggressive, he was going to push the moderator around, which he did effectively, he was going to relish the evening, enjoying it,”
When your opponents say they believe they lost you might as well claim it as a win. Romney may not have convinced conservatives that he is the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan and they may still have to close their eyes or hold their nose when they vote for him at least he might have opened a window to defeat the Progressives’ fearless leader and at least slow down America’s bullet train to bankruptcy. With a delay we may be able to turn this train around and head back to limited government, individual liberty and economic freedom.