Warnings of a Free Thinker. C. S. Lewis versus the Progressives.

One of my favorite writers of all time is C. S. Lewis, the creator of Narnia and any number of works of fiction and nonfiction. He was a Christian apologist without apology. And he could not be called a conservative.

For one, he was English, not American, so terms like liberal or conservative did not really apply. Instead, I would describe him as a Free Thinker. By that I mean Professor Lewis reached his opinion by careful study and thinking through the issue and came to rational, reasonable conclusions. He was not swayed by his emotions the way so many of us are. And in the process of his thinking, if he leaned in any direction, it was in the direction of freedom – freedom in Christ under God to be sure, but freedom.

For two, Lewis was a keen observer of the politics of his day. He understood Hitler and what the Nazis represented, but he did not dwell there. Instead, he applied his thoughts to people down through the ages and knew that the current events were only a symptom of a much larger disease.

For me, I see the history of humanity as a struggle between anarchy and tyranny. And we human beings for the most part find true anarchy so destructive and abhorrent, we willingly and have willingly given ourselves over and over to whatever tyrant promises safety, security and bread. This absolute, historical trend is continuing to this day.

In America, we have this tradition: “Give us your tired, your hungry, your poor huddled masses yearning to be free.” The founding fathers understood that this nation was an experiment, not drawn out of whole cloth as the Magna Charta, the English Parliament (in particular the House of Commons) and English common law will attest, but an experiment all the same. In America, we are trying to walk the tightrope and not fall to the left or right – neither into tyranny or anarchy. This had never successfully been done before in all of history.

Yet here we are, and presently there are those in power offering all sorts of wonderful sounding things with regard to safety, security and bread. And we are falling. Lewis well understood the danger. He said:

Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. C. S. Lewis

We are told that to stand in the way of change is to stand in the way of progress. Entitlements, we are told, are only meant to make life fair. Social Justice is the high ideal and individuals need to get in line. Morality is legislated and enforced by rules and regulations. And all of this is justified under the idea of making people equal, which in actual practice means making everyone the same. As far as that goes, I recommend another author, Madeleine L’engle and her book, Wrinkle in Time where you can see how this sort of thinking inevitably plays out.

Lewis also had a word for this kind of progress. In fact, I recommend it for everyone who calls themselves a “progressive” or who is tempted to jump on the progressive bandwagon:

We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive. C. S. Lewis

I believe this is the only understanding a Christian can have. Our faith is built on the idea that we are able by God’s grace to turn around and go the other way. And Jesus would have no problem applying this individual idea to a whole society – exactly as the proponents of so-called social justice make the application. Think about that one!

At the same time, I see where following the path we are currently on, the path so overwhelmingly supported in the media and our institutions of higher learning is currently shredding liberty in America. Freedoms are being lost. Someone is offering safety, security and bread, but before we swallow that bread, I believe we all better look carefully at where we are likely to end up. The current entitlement based, progressive bread may well be poisoned. Again, the warning:

Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. C. S. Lewis

I encourage everyone and certainly every Christian person who is willing to stand up for freedom and against tyranny. I would like to see my nation filled to overflowing with Free Thinkers. The alternative is to be a slave to one’s emotions. Consider: Hitler was not the first person to take advantage of a whole population that fell into that emotional, slavery trap, and he won’t be the last.


-Michael

The Truth About Social Security

The truth about social security is you and I got snookered. Madoff could not have planned it better. The planners sold the scheme to the American people on the idea that the money would be invested and untouched in a so-called “lock box.” When we retired, we would reap the benefits according to what we paid in. It sounded fair. But the whole thing died on the day the government voted the money into the general treasury. Died, dead, gone.

You may be receiving benefits at the present time, but remember, Madoff paid his early investors a good return out of the money his new investors were throwing at him. He did this to make the scheme look good—to entice those new investors into coughing up the big bucks. So you are living off the backs of your children and grandchildren. Do you feel good about that?

That is the reality. There is no money for you other than what you can steal from your children and grandchildren (or honestly, what the government can steal from then on your behalf). I’m 56. There is and will be no money for me, either, other than what the government can steal and put my kids in the poor house before my age. And just to be clear, I have no other pension and never made great gobs of money. I will need help when I reach retirement, only the money isn’t there!

No, no no! Don’t say you are just getting back what you invested. That is not true. You did not invest anything, despite what you were told. To be blunt: You were lied to, and so was I. Social security taxes are just that—another tax, another revenue stream for the government to spend any way they see fit. Social security taxes have nothing to do with an investment on your part. You just got TAXED, and so did I. You got lied to. I got lied to. There is no social security money, and there should be no social security benefits. Why? Because we are ruining and bankrupting our children and grandchildren by insisting on our “entitlement.”

“But I paid into the system all those years. I only want my investment. I only want what I am entitled to. That is only fair…”

Wrong, wrong, wrong! There is no system. You and I were merely taxed under a government version of the Madoff pyramid scheme. You and I got snookered. You and I sincerely should not be getting any money because there isn’t any money available to get. We may technically be owed the money, but you can’t sue a man who is broke! Don’t you get it? What? Do you think there is a secret stash of money in Washington somewhere? There isn’t any social security money. No matter how much you think you deserve it, no money means there should be no benefits either. After all who is paying for those benefits? The future…

The only way you or I can be paid our “social security benefits” is to bankrupt the future and ruin our children’s lives. You may not care about the future or our children and grandchildren, but I do. The only decent thing to do is stop social security now. Just stop it. Stop lying about investment and returns and retirement funds. And stop paying it out. Just call it the tax that the government turned it into and be done with it!

You might also want to dig up the graves of those congressmen and senators who voted the social security money out of the “lock box” and into the general fund in the first place and shoot them, hang them or fry them. That might make you feel better. But as for benefits, there are none so we should just stop this pyramid before it destroys our future and our nation. Just stop. It was all a lie. Accept that truth and move on.

Now, can the government help people set up a retirement fund that will be there for their old age? Yes, by all means, but only if the government keeps their filthy stinking hands off of it. Once they get hold of your money, you know you will never see it again. Like now, they are paying you by stealing out of your children’s pockets, by making your grandchildren “depression poor.” Do you feel good about that? I don’t. Just stop the payments, now! Find another way to help those who need help, but stop the payments now before it is too late.

And as for Medicare, the same goes for you, too!


-MichaelThe Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/ The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/

This One’s for Glenn Beck

Abraham Lincoln was the best thing to ever happen to America, and the worst thing.

Because the North won the Civil War, slavery came to an end. Granted, it was not the issue going into the war but perhaps it needed to be. Slavery is without a doubt the most cruel and dehumanizing institution ever devised by corrupt humanity. Many would see prison or even death as preferable. Thank God that slavery ended when the North won the war.

Having said that, though, we must also consider this: Because the Union (Federalists) won the war, our nation ceased to exist. All at once, the federal (central) government broke free of the restraints our founders so carefully crafted. At that point in history, the Fed could tell the states what they could do and not do with regard to everything and everyone, and it could tell individuals what they could and could not do with their own property which as we now see stretches to cover our own bodies and (politically incorrect) minds. (can you say “hate crime?”) (Can you say “McCain-Finegold?”)

If the states object at any point on any level, the federal government, thanks to winning the war, can enforce their decisions if necessary by force. Individual citizens have even less hope than the states now that they have the cowed states enforcing the federal mandates. Object? Ha! What are you going to do about it? Yeah? You and what Confederate army?

The idea that we need a return to the Constitution is a lovely, impossible ideal. We haven’t been a constitutional nation since reconstruction. Some have suggested that we need a second American Revolution as alluded to in the name “Tea Parties.” I think what we may need is a second Civil War, one where slavery is no longer an issue. It is the states who need to put the federal government back into the very small and limited place where it belongs, assuming the genie can be put back into the bottle. Then the citizens of the various states need to rise up and tell their state governments “Don’t tread on me.”

Of course, if you need some moral motivation, how about all of the hard working taxpayers who have become little more than slaves to the entitlement class. We ought to end slavery, don’t you think?


-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/

Tyranny, it isn’t just for governments anymore…

Tyranny is a word bandied about all too often these days, and by many people who don’t understand what they are talking about. I would rather this post was not necessary, but the truth is it is important for us to discuss. Why? Because too many people are suffering and I cannot see any relief on the horizon. So, to begin an honest discussion, we must first understand what tyranny is or at least how it works so we don’t also stumble in misunderstandings.

Tyranny deletes freedom. This is a given by definition. It limits or eliminates choices. Others make decisions on your behalf: what you must do, where you can go, and at times even what you must wear. German Jews in the thirties wore the Star of David. There was no debate. The face of democracy in Myanmar got put under house arrest with no appeal — at least through the next election.

Now, the military is a tyrannical system (perhaps by necessity). People with rank tell those without rank where to go and what to do and even what to wear. But the fact that the military is often successful in its missions must be noted. Tyranny is not necessarily cumbersome or inefficient – not like democracies. Mussolini made the trains run on time, and the people of Italy rejoiced.

But to succeed, there are two things tyranny must do: First, it must dehumanize people, and Second, it must insulate (or isolate) those at the top so their decisions are not touched (or influenced) by the people (common humanity).

First: Sometimes, tyranny may go so far as to demonize people, like the Jews in Nazi Germany or like the Nobility in the early days of the French Revolution. It is not uncommon, historically, to demonize the perceived enemies of the prevailing tyrannical order. To be sure, enemy lists are common: keep that in mind all of you wacko-liberals and conservative, right-wing extremists!.

Yet for most people – those not actively engaged in some form of dissent – at the least, tyranny must dehumanize. This is the only way to insure that “a few people” can make those hard decisions that may mean life or death for “most of the people.” It might be hard to deny Bob or Mary their daily bread. It is not so hard to deny 276-B and 617-M.

For example: The military is well known for name, rank and serial number. That the men and women have names is nice, but what really matters is the rank and serial number. In the military, people are not people, they are numbers; and if you doubt the dehumanization that the military does in order to function effectively, try some basic training.

Second: It is imperative that those at the top be isolated in order to make the hard decisions without being swayed by genuine human considerations. This follows like night and day from the need to dehumanize. Those at the top and also those on the job need to live in a psychological bubble, if not a real one. This is the way bureaucrats have worked successfully since the beginning of time. The chief defense for death camp prison guards at Nuremburg was “I was just doing my job.” It did not matter to them that people were being gassed and thrown into ovens. “I was just paid (required) to do my job, and that is all I did.” The bubble is imperative for any tyrannical system to operate effectively.

Tyranny through the last century and into this one has come in many forms. One primary form has been in the board room and the upper reaches of the corporate world, and it is particularly apparent when a company becomes “Too big to fail.” Hundreds of thousands of jobs have been lost over the past year, and at an alarming rate. Do you think anyone has lost any sleep over that fact? Corporate Executives generally cannot even name a person on the “front lines” in their own business. It’s just numbers. We had 50 in that department. Now we have 30. (And to be clear, those 30 now have to work like slaves for fear of their own job). Meanwhile, 20 more have joined the ranks of people who through no particular fault of their own have been discarded. Yet the company goes on, telling people what to do, where to go (if they want to keep their job) and even what to wear (dress code).

And, of course, there is the government. Now, you knew this was coming so don’t get your partisan knickers in a twist. Instead, let’s go back a bit in time. One (if not the) primary purpose of the United States Constitution was to guard against tyranny. The Great Experiment, so-called, was to have a severely limited and deliberately restricted central government which would be responsible for the minimum duties deemed necessary for unity. The central government was to keep its hands off and fingers out of everything else…everything. Life was to be in the hands of the states, the local communities and with certain individual liberties guaranteed. I don’t believe anyone would argue with the fact that we are a long way from the American, constitutional ideal. These days, it is nearly impossible to find any aspect of life where the federal government does not have some stake – a finger if not a whole hand. So what happened?

A debatable history, but just as fast as I can put it:

I believe the tipping point came when the Federal forces beat the States (we called it the Civil War). The big central government won... and Lincoln was a Republican! By the time of Herbert Hover (another Republican) things had slid so far (and the central government had become so big and isolated) the answer perceived for the stock market crash was MORE regulation and HIGHER taxes. (Can you say, “Let them eat cake?”).

Of course, this led to the election of FDR, (a Democrat) who, far from pulling the government back from intervention in life, actually accelerated the process. (Crisis you know: Depression and then the war). The agricultural business in this country was socialized so long ago by price supports and subsidies, we don’t even question it. Likewise steel, railroads, well… etc.

Then, LBJ (another Democrat) further accelerated the process by designing federal programs that actually encouraged dependency which, to speak plainly, encouraged the tyranny of the central government to tell people what to do, where to go, where to live and how much they were worth!

I believe both Kennedy and Reagan (in their own ways) did try to slow down the growth of tyranny, but more recently, Clinton sped it back up again, and so did Bush.

So now we have Obama and we find we are going to be told what kind of cars we can drive, what our salary will be, how much money we can make with the warning that if we make too much, it will be taken from us. We are to be told what doctor we can see, what treatment we can get if we get ill, how we can heat or cool our homes, what energy we are allowed to use, and how much it will cost us… And what can you do with your own property without getting nine million permits and plan approvals first, not the least from the EPA?

With all of this, do I blame Barak Obama? Absolutely not. He is the conclusion, not the premise. So what then, is the Great experiment over? Despite all of the safeguards built into the system by the founders, have we slid into tyranny anyway? Perhaps we have. What I really want to know, though, is what our uniform is going to be. It can’t be brown shirts. That’s been done. Personally, I vote for green shirts. That would seem to fit the current culture and climate.


-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/

An atheist nation by default?

Why must these United States be made an atheist nation by default?

The Constitution says the federal government will not establish a national religion. OK, I get that part. But then it says the federal government will not prohibit the free exercise of religion, and that restriction includes the actions of the federal courts and the Supreme Court.

It seems to me the courts have been violating the free exercise clause for some fifty years now, and should be ashamed.

I read Thomas Jefferson’s letter to that man where he assured the man that the national government would not impose a religion on everyone. He suggested the constitution makes something like a wall of separation, and it does as I have stated. It says nothing, however, about state, county or local governments. Yet the atheist community has seized on the idea of “separation of church and state” like it is the gospel, and I mean gospel, and with it, they are forcing the majority of Americans to live in an atheist world. Why is this nonsense happening?

As long as it isn’t mandatory—so it doesn’t interfere with a person’s free exercise of a non-praying religion or even no religion at all--is there anything unconstitutional with a local school board instituting prayer before every school day? No. the board is local, not federal.

What is unconstitutional about posting, even referring to the 10 commandments in a local, county or state court? Nothing. Such a posting cannot be construed as the federal government imposing a national religion. Which religion anyway? Judaism, Christianity or Islam?

So what if a church wants to build a nativity scene on a public park at Christmas time. Do church people not have access to public lands just like anyone else? The state of Massachusetts collected taxes to support the Congregational Church in Massachusetts until the 1920s, for crying out loud, and no one ever said that was unconstitutional.

Nor does anyone (yet) claim constitutional violation when the Congress and the Supreme Court itself opens each session with prayer.

Yet, in the last 50 years or so, the federal courts and Supreme Court have systematically shredded the free exercise cause and removed every vestige of religion from public life. Thus, faith is diminished and atheism is empowered. Why have we allowed this?

Something close to the truth: We have ceased to be a democratic republic of one person, one vote and majority rule. We have become a tyranny of the one, where one “offended” person can decide for and control the entire community, state and even nation, trumping the majority.

So how about this: I am offended by the removal of religious expression from all of these areas of life. Maybe I should sue. Maybe I should take it all the way to the Supreme Court.


-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/