The Present Crisis

I once had someone suggest to me that our government should pay mothers to stay home and take care of their children. They would not have to leave the home in order to find work and earn enough to make ends meet. Research abounds to support the benefits of a mother who stays at home and is therefore typically the most constant and important influence in a child’s life. Her argument was that the government would actually save money because you could reduce the amount of money spent on all of the social ills of our culture including prisons, drugs, health issues, teenage/unwanted pregnancies etc. I am reminded of this conversation with my friend after recently reading a BRILLIANT, old poem by James Russell Lowell titled, The Present Crisis.

This was not an easy, breezy, lemon-squeezy type of poem. All ninety lines are dripping with meaning and feeling. There are words that I had to look up and references to ideas that needed to be learned. I took each stanza apart and tried to pull the meaning and the symbolism out. I took my time. I have worked on it off and on for about a week. I have my analysis finished and am now just re-listening to it and finding that I can’t believe how much this poem speaks to me! This poem is not dead! It is every bit as pertinent today as it was 179 years ago.`

I have always had a passion for liberty and the preservation of our freedoms. I get discouraged when I see the apathy of those around me. I get discouraged when I see people willing to trade their liberty for a little bit of security or comfort now. I also get discouraged when we don’t learn from the mistakes of the past. Old ideas are recycled with a fresh coat of paint and passed off as new. This poem doesn’t pull any punches. It blasts each and every one of these tendencies into oblivion. It puts the full responsibility of maintaining freedom and liberty on our shoulders—yours and mine.

So why do I find myself pondering on a conversation about someone offering to pay me for taking care of my own children?

Currently, the earth is aching for deeds of freedom to be done—all over the world, not just in the obvious places, but even here, in what was once known as the bastion of liberty, and is still considered so by most. The cyclical nature of the history of humans is well known. Name one civilization that doesn’t fall somewhere on this cycle of freedom. Name one culture/civilization that was not destroyed mostly because of the selfishness and complacency, which grew out of Abundance. Does anyone argue that the earth isn’t ripe for the pendulum of liberty to swing towards the dependency/bondage portion of the cycle. 

You can read a good article about this cycle here.

We depend on the government elite and the so-called experts sanctioned by the government elite to help us with almost every single facet of our lives. They effect our education, our healthcare, our businesses, homes, banking, our private property and natural resources. Their ever-so-helpful hands are into what we watch, what we eat, what we do in our spare time, who we support, who we disagree with and how we show that support. We have become so dependent on them that we cannot even call religion solely our own domain anymore.

Bondage is just around the next corner. We are already partially there. What the government pays for, the government controls. My sister-in-law and her husband are fostering two children. They have gone through the state to become certified in order to become trustworthy enough for the state to trust them with two beautiful children. The state will pay for the children’s basic needs however the state tells them how to discipline, how to feed them, what to feed them, how to organize their house, when to take them to the doctor, who can babysit for them and requires them to comply with the smallest of details even down to the year that the crib was made. Nothing is left to the common sense of the foster parents. ----they are in bondage--- All in the name of, “For the good of the children.”

This is why hearing my friend tell me that she thought it was a good idea for the government to pay me to be a mom actually made me physically sick. The thought of a government beaurocrat coming into my house and telling me how to take care of my children was abhorrent to me. I love my children more than my own life. I am the one who has the stewardship to receive inspiration for their benefit-not some do-gooder with a clipboard to check off the list of standards met or failed. They are unique and precious and individual—Just like yours! We will each have to answer to God for our decisions, choices and relationships regarding our children. We do not need a government expert who isn’t even allowed to believe in that God telling us what to do.

My point is this: Our freedoms are slipping from our fingers through not only the outright, blatant, destruction which comes from power-hungry elites but also from the seemingly good intentions of our friends and our neighbors. Every time we yield our own responsibility towards our own life or our children's lives, we become more and more dependent upon a beneficent government to make those decisions for us.  Regardless of where the danger comes from though, it is our duty, according to Lowell, We ourselves must Pilgrims be, launching our Mayflower and steering BOLDLY through the desperate winter sea.

The future lies with us! We have to keep going. We have to keep moving forward—to continually be doing right, advocating for right. We absolutely CANNOT simply rely on the freedom that our ancestors have won and continue thinking that all is well. Slavery, in whatever form it takes is a heinous, wretched result of allowing ourselves to become dependent on our benefactors for a life of ease and luxury. In reality, those taskmasters, says Lowell, are still groping, waiting for their miserable prey. By doing nothing to stop them now, we are in actuality guiding their gory fingers to where our helpless children play. Siding with truth is not always popular or financially advisable, but it is the coward who waits to do anything until it is fashionable or profitable. The brave man refuses to make compromise with sin.

Thoughts inspired by Pride and Prejudice

Thoughts inspired by contemplating this question while reading Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austin.

Is there anything in my life that I am doing to impress others more than a desire to be true to God?

I know that in my homeschooling I am still very sensitive to the outward appearance of learning and reaching certain benchmarks according to the public perception of when something should be learned. My reasons for this are not all purely selfish or vain. Part of me is just so sensitive to the home vs public school debate that I don’t want to give anyone a reason to badmouth homeschooling. I want to prove, through the success of my children, to everyone that homeschooling is an especially effective, and successful option. My mistake is made when I imply that “success” has to be immediate and constant—and not just in the end result.

I cannot explain to all of the people within my sphere of influence that I have a tried and true process and that my timeline is not the same as theirs. I can’t tell them that inspiration is fundamental to how and when I teach certain things. I don’t have time to explain that if my children learn according to their wants/needs then the lesson learned will be so much more effective when it is finally learned.  I just simply don’t have time to go into depth about all the theories behind my homeschooling choices. Nor do they want me to.

Most people don’t really want to know why I do the things I do. They don’t want to listen to my opinions. They simply want to make sure that their child is doing okay-that their child is ahead of the game. They want to be able to compare and feel justified in their own choices.

So why do I worry about what they think of me or of my desire to homeschool or their opinion of my child’s intelligence? Why do I hamper my children with conveyor-belt style educational leftovers from public school? I yell, urge, twist, manipulate and am constantly frustrated by the tail-chasing that I do.

If I was true to principles given by God however, I would eventually have not only a wonderfully educated, loving, righteous, brilliant child who grows up to fulfill their own individual mission here upon this earth but also the respect of any friends or colleagues who’s opinions and regard are worth having.

God’s way is NEVER manipulative! He never twists things to His advantage. He does urge, but rarely, if ever, yells. His way is completely based on principle. He does not cater to the public whim. He does not fluctuate with every new fad or theory. He created the heavens. He organized the earth. He is the alpha and the omega. He knows what he is doing. Why would I care more about the opinions of my neighbor than I care about the inspiration from the Lord of Lords? His definition of success might be different from that of my neighbor, but whose idea of success would you rather reach? Would you rather hear, “hey, nice job! Your son made it into Harvard and was voted most likely to succeed class of 2015.” Or, “Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.”

The Law

I recently finished an amazing 75 page booklet entitled, "The Law" by Fredrick Bastiat. I remember reading this as a youth and I even had a few comments  underlined. This time however, I almost couldn't stop underlining. Everything in it seemed to be relevant to today's world--even though it had originally been written in 1850. I want to write some of the notes that I took in the hope that it will shed light on some of the fallacies regarding the proper role of government and legislation. I take no credit for these ideas. Most of what I write here comes directly or indirectly from this book. These are just my notes which I have gathered to help me formulate and understand the ideas contained in the book.

Our law has been perverted. It has been converted from an instrument of "justice for all" to an instrument of "legalized plunder."

Our lives, liberty and property (natural resources) are gifts from God. These gifts preceded laws. Consequently, they are not created by the laws. In fact, because these things already existed, we sought to establish laws in defense of these gifts. The common force (laws) should only do what an individual has a natural right to do: that is protect persons, liberties, and property, and maintain the right of each. If the law acts in any way which uses force to destroy the rights of others, the law is in direct opposition to its own purpose. Justice has been destroyed.

The law has been perverted by two causes: Greed and False Philanthropy. The common tendency of mankind is to live and prosper at the expense of others. Men will plunder whenever plunder is easier than work. It stops whenever plunder becomes more painful and more dangerous than labor. The purpose of law is to stop plunder. The law should protect property and punish plunder. If however, the law is used as a means of plunder itself, the law is used to destroy independence and is only a benefit of the person who makes the law. The rest of the people either wish to stop lawful plunder or they wish to share in it. (If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.) Bastiat says, in effect, "the conversion of law into an instrument of plunder is one of the greatest evils to a free society."

How do you know if a law is just or if it is simply legalized plunder?

Ask yourself, "Does the law take from some persons what belongs to them and give it to other person to whom it does not belong?"If law is used against liberty it is also used against justice, thereby acting against its purposes.

The second way the law has been perverted is by false philanthropy. The idea of providing general welfare by general plunder is ludicrous. The law cannot organize labor, education, or religion without destroying justice. The law should only be defensive--only stopping one from harming others--it never violates his personal liberty.

Nothing can enter the public treasury for the benefit of one citizen or class unless other citizens or classes have been forced to send it in. Forced organization is the problem, not natural organization. We are all able and even encouraged to organize and give of our surplus willingly. There is a fundamental difference between forced organization vs natural organizing, forced fraternity vs true fraternity and artificial unity vs the natural unity of mankind under providence. Many people, especially socialists, confuse the distinction between government and society thereby every time we object to a thing being done by government, the they conclude that we object to it being done at all. How did they ever get the idea that the law could be made to produce what it does not contain?

Liberty is the freedom of EVERY person to make full use of his faculties (granted to him by God), so long as he does not harm other persons while doing so. If the law were restricted to protecting ALL persons, liberty and all property then EVERONE'S interest in the law would be the same. If our nation were founded on that basis it would be the most just, economical, limited government imaginable. Everyone would know privileges, but also the responsibilities.

Whatever Happened to Penny Candy?

Are you baffled by economics and frustrated with attempting to understand the tax code and the ramifications of certain decisions which the United States Congress has recently undertaken? How is a "normal, every-day citizen" supposed to follow and understand everything that is going on? We are trying to grasp the concepts of the stock-market and figure out why the world's markets seem to be going completely berserk. We question the decisions of congress but don't understand how exactly they should be fixed. The chaos is getting so intense that we really just want to bury our head in the sand and pretend like it doesn't actually affect us and our families. We want to pretend that there is nothing that we can do and we want to busy ourselves with so many little busy-work projects that we say to ourselves, "I don't have time for that. Someone else will have to fight that fight."

Well, I'm a firm believer that "truth" is not complicated. A true principle will stand the test of time. A true principle will guide you to good things no matter how complicated the world becomes. 

There is a great, little book written by Richard Maybury called, "Whatever Happened to Penny Candy?" that has helped me get a firmer grip on some economic principles that have extreme relevance to our nations current financial decisions. Designed to be an introduction to economic principles for jr. high to high school students I have found it very easy to read and understand. Let me give you a few of the high points that I have been reminded of. 

Governments generate ZERO revenue. They do however spend revenue. Where do they get the money to pay for all of the programs that they generate? They only have three options. They tax, borrow or inflate. We are all pretty familiar with the tax and I'll save borrowing/debt for another time so let's move on to the third option. Candidates are elected to office by telling people that they will give you all of the things you want and he will make someone else pay for it. That is a big lie, however, for we all know deep down that, "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch." He tells people this in order to get elected, then when he gets elected and the bill comes due he doesn't want to tax them or else they'll get mad and won't re-elect him. So instead, he decides to "inflate" the money supply.

Inflation is simply a principle of supply and demand. (When the supply of something goes up, the price per unit of that thing goes down.) Vice versa, if there is very little money, the money is very valuable and it will buy a great deal. Inflation is an increase in the money supply-not the value--but the supply, the actual number of dollars printed by the government. Inflating (increasing) the supply of money causes the value of each dollar to go down. When the value goes down you need more of it to buy what you want--prices rise. As we speak, all over the world, government officials are creating so much money that the money is losing its value. Prices are rising almost everywhere. Extra money has been created so that the government officials can use it to pay for what they buy. Both democracies and dictators inflate. Dictators inflate because they fear revolutions while in republics or democracies they inflate to cover the constant promises of the politicians so that they don't have to increase taxes.

Whenever the government tries to "check" inflation by establishing wage/price controls the people stop working. Companies shut down. More jobs are lost. Why would someone continue making a product when the value they get for their work is less than the cost to make it? Shortages develop.

Inflation causes business people to make mistakes. The influx of new money causes them to get really excited. They spend too much, and grow too fast in order to meet the new demands of the spending spree. When the inflation stops, the business people see their mistakes and start making corrections. They must fire workers and unemployment goes up. Now if the inflation starts up again, the correction stops and the workers go back to work. A recession has happened. If the inflation does not start up again, the corrections are completed. Unemployment stays up for a longer time because the workers cannot go back to their old jobs; they must find new ones. That's a depression. Inflation causes recessions and depressions. Just to be clear--the government causes inflation by printing more dollars which decreases the value of the dollars that you already have thereby causing prices to go up.

Think about our relative recent history. There was massive post WWI inflation in the 1920's. With all of those wonderfully new dollars people spent and spent. Then when the inflation was halted in 1929 you had the Great 1929 Stock Market Crash and the Great Depression. Look at even more recent history to find that it does indeed repeat itself. The 1982 recession was the worst since the Great Depression. To end it, officials inflated the money supply heavily between 1983 and 1986. Some of this new money went into the stock market causing it to rise. This encouraged other investors causing a huge boom in the market. When the inflation was slowed again in 1987, the supply of new money dried up and we got one of the worst crashes in history and eventually a recession.

According to the author you should take a look at the history of money sometime. Whenever you find a good, reliable, non inflated money, you almost always find a strong, healthy civilization. Whenever you find unreliable, inflated money, you almost always find a civilization in decay.

There is so much more packed into this great little book. I highly recommend it to you and especially to help the younger generation start to understand the results of government manipulation of our money supply. What I've talked about here is just a drop in the bucket. I hope that it is at least a place to start. In the meantime, here are a few other things you can do to take action on this important topic:

Pay attention to the economic policies of the government and the federal reserve. Demand that your government stop inflating. Visit this link to research and urge your congressmen to support and co-sponser the Audit the Fed bill. Resist price controls and remember that the only way to stop inflation is to spread ethics---quit demanding more and more and more from a government whose only recourse is to take from someone else every single thing that it gives to you.