Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - January 08, 2020


REPLAY: Socialism


Episode Stats


Length

56 minutes

Words per minute

177.7001

Word count

10,100

Sentence count

538

Harmful content

Misogyny

7

sentences flagged

Hate speech

27

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

In this episode of Relatable, I talk about socialism and what it stands for. I discuss the differences between socialism and capitalism, the benefits and drawbacks of socialism, and why we should all be on board the socialist train.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.240 Hey guys, what's up? Welcome to Relatable. I am so excited about today's episode. I have
00:00:07.640 gotten lots of emails, messages, comments over the past year asking me to talk about
00:00:13.640 socialism. We have talked about socialism in the past and a lot of you who already listen
00:00:19.480 to other political podcasts or you read political books or you've been involved in politics
00:00:24.160 for any amount of time, you probably already know a lot about socialism and probably know
00:00:29.640 a lot of the things that I'm going to cover today. I certainly am not a socialist expert
00:00:35.040 and then I, you know, I haven't been studying the history of Soviet Russia for the past 13
00:00:41.340 years of my life or anything like that. But I have been studying this, of course, especially
00:00:46.600 since Bernie Sanders came on the scene and it seemed like socialism was going to be the
00:00:51.700 big new thing, especially among our generations. And the fact of the matter is there is, there
00:00:57.340 are a lot of people who follow me and follow this podcast that don't know about socialism
00:01:01.760 and don't know about socialist policies. What's the difference in socialism and welfare? Is
00:01:07.120 there any biblical aspect to socialism that we should be okay with, that we as Christians
00:01:12.160 should get on board with? These are perfectly wonderful and appropriate questions. It's okay
00:01:16.940 if you don't know everything about socialism. It's okay if you don't know anything about socialism,
00:01:20.640 but at least you've realized if you've messaged me or reached out to me, this is probably
00:01:25.460 something that we need to discuss and that we need to know about, at least in some kind
00:01:30.540 of basic way. And that's what we are going to do today. So you already know how I feel
00:01:37.060 about socialism. Like I'm not coming at this from an approach of like, I don't really know
00:01:41.380 how I feel about this kind of stuff. You know that I'm anti-socialism. You know that I don't
00:01:46.120 think that socialism is good. Nevertheless, I am going to do my very best to give you only factual
00:01:51.380 information, of course, coupled with my analysis as this podcast always is. And I'm not just going
00:01:57.080 to give you this kind of one-sided story and not just what I want you to hear. I'm going to give you
00:02:02.120 the facts. Now, like I said, I already have an opinion about it. You are going to get my analysis
00:02:06.920 throughout this. So don't expect this kind of like middle of the road on maybe socialism is not
00:02:13.140 that bad after all. That's not what this podcast is. So I don't want any reviews from y'all saying,
00:02:18.000 oh, you didn't give socialism a chance. Well, Venezuela gave socialism a chance and we saw how
00:02:24.360 that turned out. OK, first of all, what is socialism? According to Encyclopedia Britannica,
00:02:31.100 socialism is a social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or
00:02:36.440 control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work
00:02:41.560 in isolation, but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce
00:02:46.860 is in some sense a social product and everyone who contributes to the production of good is
00:02:51.580 entitled to a share in its society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property
00:02:57.060 for the benefit of all of its members. So that's that's according to Encyclopedia Britannica. So
00:03:02.820 let us break that down. In America, whether you are on the right or the left, we are all more familiar
00:03:08.260 with capitalists or capitalism because it is the economy that we currently have and that we have had.
00:03:14.820 So I think socialism is probably easier understood from our perspective through the lens of
00:03:21.820 capitalism. Capitalism believes in private property and private earnings. You make a profit.
00:03:27.240 You use that profit for the most part to feed yourself, feed your family, give to charity. You do with it
00:03:32.860 what you see fit. Of course, you do pay taxes in the capitalist society, but the profit that you earn
00:03:38.820 is for you and you have your own property that you are entitled to. As socialism believes for the
00:03:45.360 most part in shared property or collective ownership, a socialist would say that all work is done for
00:03:50.600 the good of the whole, not just of the individual, not just for the good of your family, not just for the
00:03:55.220 good of a corporation or a business, but for the good of everyone. That's what a socialist would say
00:03:59.460 that they stand for. Now, you might be thinking, well, what is wrong with that? It sounds very generous
00:04:04.820 to me. It sounds really good. Maybe even sounds like the early church a little bit. Everyone
00:04:08.860 working together in cooperation for the common good. That sounds awesome. It sounds like the
00:04:14.980 opposite of greed. And isn't that what we want, especially as Christians? Don't we want the
00:04:19.200 opposite of greed? Don't we want some kind of generosity among our communities? But hang on just a
00:04:26.060 second. So here is what the definitions of socialism, if you noticed in the Encyclopedia Britannica,
00:04:31.660 if you noticed in the generous definition of socialism that I gave you, here is what is
00:04:38.600 missing in the pitches for a socialist economy or a socialist country. The how. How do we go from
00:04:47.640 private ownership, which is what we have now, to public ownership, or as they say, democratic ownership
00:04:53.960 or collective ownership? Socialists will say that in a socialist society, the people are in charge.
00:05:01.480 There is no real hierarchy. There are no oppressive power systems. The people control. The people are
00:05:08.560 leading. The people are cooperating together to meet the needs of those around them. No one is getting
00:05:13.260 exploited by profit-driven corporations, they would say. But how? Who puts the means of production in the
00:05:20.620 hands of the people? Making sure that they're in the hands of the people rather than what they would 0.58
00:05:25.800 say in the hands of these corporations? Who makes sure that this is all democratically owned and
00:05:32.060 collectively owned? What if someone wants to keep her private property? What if I want to keep my
00:05:38.100 private property? What if I want to keep my profits to provide for myself and to provide for my family?
00:05:44.060 Who makes sure that my profits and my property are collectively owned rather than individually owned?
00:05:49.440 What happens then? That's what socialists don't want to say. That's what they don't want to talk
00:05:55.560 about is the how. How we go from personal private property to collective ownership of the means of
00:06:01.880 production. All of that, the truth is that all of that is impossible without government coercion. If I
00:06:08.800 don't want to give up 95% of my profits or however much it is, if I don't want to give up a private
00:06:15.560 property or private ownership, there has to be an authority to come along and to make me do it.
00:06:21.020 Someone has to take the money that I make and the property that I have away from me, away from my
00:06:26.720 family, and force me to give it to the community. But here's the other thing. My money, even if it's
00:06:33.340 given up, say I want that. Say I want my money to go to the socialist class. I don't get to give my
00:06:41.260 money directly to the people that I want to give it to. I don't get to give my money directly to the
00:06:45.660 causes that I care about. I give it to the government. And so in a socialist society, we're
00:06:51.260 talking to anywhere from 60 to 90% of the paycheck. It just kind of depends. It depends on how much you
00:06:57.460 make. It depends on how much you live and what the policies are. A large majority of my profit,
00:07:02.840 my paycheck, is given to the government to redistribute to the country and to the community
00:07:07.560 how the government sees fit. So not how I see fit. So when we hear about socialism,
00:07:13.340 meaning generosity, well, you don't see really where that money goes. You don't get to decide
00:07:19.640 where the money goes. The government decides where the money goes. Socialists, a lot of times you'll
00:07:25.300 hear them decry the evils of corporations, how corporations exploit their employees and
00:07:29.560 corporations are greedy and they're immoral, which we can talk about that as a problem. I do think that
00:07:35.900 that's a problem. We can talk about that. We can work to solve that problem. But the solution
00:07:39.620 to that problem, to the greed of corporations or the exploitation of some corporations is not
00:07:45.080 shifting power from a corporation, which is an organization that takes your time, your money,
00:07:49.340 and your energy on a voluntary basis, shifting the power away from them to the government who takes
00:07:54.980 your time, money, and energy away from you on a coercive basis. So at least corporations who you could
00:08:01.320 argue have too much power, you could argue exploit their employees, you could argue you have too much
00:08:05.480 greed. Well, we can decide whether or not we want to buy from those corporations. We can decide
00:08:09.460 whether or not we want to work for those corporations. We cannot decide in a socialist
00:08:14.980 society whether or not we give our money to the government and whether or not we are under the rule
00:08:19.780 of the government. We just are, or else we're considered lawless. And that is exactly why in order
00:08:25.920 to accomplish a socialist society, it takes a strong government to make you hand over your money,
00:08:31.600 your property, your time, your energy, whatever it is, in order to cooperate. It all sounds well
00:08:36.320 and good until you ask the how. How does socialism come about? So I just want to be clear up front
00:08:42.260 that this is not some happy-go-lucky time where we're all linking arms and saying, yeah,
00:08:49.020 government, take everything that I have and distribute it for the good of those around me
00:08:53.340 without really my say in it. Now, democratic socialists will say, well, you do have a say in it.
00:08:58.960 But, of course, they also believe in a pure democracy where you have the tyranny of the
00:09:03.360 majority and you have mob rule. And so if someone like me doesn't believe in socialism or giving up
00:09:08.320 my private property, well, the government's going to make you do that anyway because the majority
00:09:12.660 ruled against you. Now, of course, this already happens in the sense that I might pay taxes
00:09:18.480 to something that I don't want to pay taxes to. There are plenty of things that my federal tax
00:09:22.400 dollars go to that I don't agree with. But it's a little bit different than in a socialist society
00:09:30.180 to where you don't get to keep hardly any of your profits and you don't keep any of your private
00:09:35.080 property. So like I said, you cannot have socialism without big government. Do not let them lie to you
00:09:41.600 about that. So when you hear the terms socially controlled or democratically controlled, understand
00:09:46.980 that this means government controlled because you have to ask how things go from privately owned to
00:09:54.460 collectively owned. An authority has to force people to give up their money and their property
00:09:59.320 so that authority can redistribute those resources how they see fit. If everyone were already giving
00:10:05.540 their money and their property on a voluntary basis, socialism wouldn't be necessary. We wouldn't
00:10:09.940 even be having this conversation. But because human beings have this crazy desire to own property,
00:10:15.080 which we will talk about as a natural desire, a desire to keep their, to earn their keep and to
00:10:20.400 keep what they earn, big government is necessary for seizing the means of production and ensuring
00:10:26.340 in theory that everyone is cared for because a lot of people aren't going to voluntarily get on board
00:10:31.200 with this. They don't want to say this because they realize that people don't really like the sound,
00:10:35.840 especially people in the West and in the United States. They don't like the sound of their freedom
00:10:39.620 being trampled on. But socialists, and I think this is an honest way to describe them,
00:10:45.440 socialists see individual freedom as a worthy thing to give up or a worthy exchange for the
00:10:50.720 meeting of the needs of the poor, how they would describe it. That's the transaction that they see
00:10:56.960 happening, that if people simply give up their right to private ownership or their right to earn a
00:11:01.600 profit and hand these things over to our oh so benevolent bureaucrats that reign above us, 1.00
00:11:06.580 these bureaucrats will ensure that everyone is taken care of, that no one is marginalized,
00:11:10.460 that no one is oppressed, no one is trampled on. Socialists see themselves as the enemy to what
00:11:15.620 they call the elite. They typically depict the elite as these rich CEOs who are wielding their
00:11:20.660 wealth to push those to the bottom further down. They don't believe there is any reality,
00:11:25.940 at least anymore, to the American dream. The idea that someone can go, anyone can go from
00:11:30.780 nothing to something, can pull themselves up by the bootstraps, make something of themselves,
00:11:36.440 they believe that for the most part, that the poor are inescapably oppressed by big business,
00:11:41.380 which of course is silly considering the economic mobility that exists in this country,
00:11:46.280 even for the most poor. But regardless, they don't believe that the free market is truly free,
00:11:52.560 but rather is being manipulated by those with the most money. So they see capitalism as a tool to hurt
00:11:58.200 the poor, not to give poor people the ability to lift themselves up. This is why you hear people like
00:12:05.760 Bernie Sanders talking about the 1%, how the 1% is hoarding all of the wealth in this country.
00:12:11.860 You will also hear the term fair share. This is something that we have heard from all the
00:12:15.920 Democratic presidential candidates so far, that the rich need to pay their fair share. Well,
00:12:21.180 what they won't tell you is that the top 50% of earners in this country already account for almost
00:12:27.280 100% of the tax revenue. The people at the bottom hardly pay anything in taxes, if at all. Some of them
00:12:33.080 make money from the government, which begs the question, what is fair share? They can't really,
00:12:41.020 what is rich? What is fair share? Well, they can't really say. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who of course 0.72
00:12:46.000 calls herself a socialist or a democratic socialist, which there's really not much of a difference
00:12:49.580 there. It's just socialism that you choose, has said that 70% would probably be what she picks for
00:12:56.800 the very rich. I think she kind of just said that arbitrarily in her 60 Minutes interview with
00:13:01.460 Anderson Cooper. But who are the very rich? Well, AOC said in a tweet, only the really rich. She's
00:13:07.440 talking about the really rich. She said like Betsy DeVos rich. That only includes, she said like 10
00:13:13.520 people. No, it doesn't. You realize that the majority of your comrades in Hollywood probably
00:13:19.760 fall into this category, right? So they can't really say what a fair share is, and they can't really say
00:13:26.300 who the really rich are. They don't want to put an exact number on it because they know what's going
00:13:31.820 to change if they actually ever got the power to do this. Because fair and fairness is a very
00:13:37.340 arbitrary term in this sense, unless you mean a truly fair tax, which would mean that everyone gets
00:13:43.680 taxed the same rate, a flat tax rate. In a truly fair system, the wealthy pay still a good deal more.
00:13:51.200 So if everything or if everyone pays, for example, a 10% income tax, the millionaire is obviously going
00:13:58.000 to be paying a lot more amount wise than the person who makes $25,000 a year. Right now we have an unfair
00:14:04.600 progressive tax system in which the more you make, the larger percentage you pay in taxes. I don't really
00:14:12.960 understand how that equals the rich paying their fair share. They're already paying not just a more in
00:14:18.080 an amount, which would make sense, but a more percentage wise than poor people do or than middle
00:14:24.920 class people do or anyone who is below them. That is inherently unfair. And yet those on the left insist
00:14:31.220 that the rich need to be paying even more, that to them that would be fair. I don't know how you decide
00:14:36.480 what is more fair in a progressive tax system. But that is how socialists believe that they will fund
00:14:43.260 socialism by taxing the rich almost in totality. So that will go to pay for everyone's health care,
00:14:49.220 everyone's education, the large government that is necessary to maintain and enforce socialism.
00:14:56.060 Now, what happens, the question is, what happens when there are no more rich people because you've taxed
00:15:01.100 them all into oblivion? They don't have an answer for that. Socialism both demonizes and depends on
00:15:07.460 billionaires. So if you demonize to the rich into non-existence, where do you go for the money
00:15:13.700 that you need to maintain socialism? That's what Margaret Thatcher said is the problem with
00:15:19.540 socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money. That's just common sense. That's
00:15:23.580 just true. You don't create more money. I know a lot of people on the socialist left believe that you
00:15:28.060 just create more money, but that's not how it works. Heavy taxation of the rich to accomplish wealth
00:15:35.260 redistribution to take power out of the hands of the people at the top of the economic food chain
00:15:39.900 is central to socialism. That's what socialism really runs on. And to understand why we to to
00:15:49.480 understand why this is, we have to understand something. You cannot separate socialism and social
00:15:57.400 justice. Social justice today, if we as we have discussed many times on this podcast is based on the
00:16:03.240 desire for equal outcomes, not equal opportunity, equal outcomes. So that is what socialists see as
00:16:11.460 true equality. And now this is very different from the equality recognized in say the Declaration of
00:16:17.760 Independence, which says all men are created equal and were endowed by their creator with certain
00:16:22.360 inalienable rights among them being life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This equal means equal
00:16:27.060 in the one in the Declaration means equal in value, equal in worth, equal in the eyes of the law,
00:16:31.920 equally made in the image of God. Now, it is important to know, it's important to know that
00:16:37.860 this equality of worth recognized in the founding documents has, of course, been demonstrated
00:16:41.860 completely and perfectly throughout America's history. When you look at slavery, when you look
00:16:46.980 at Chinese railroads, when you look at Japanese internment camps, Jim Crow, but it's an idea that is
00:16:54.740 correct. It is an idea that will properly recognize legally leads to human flourishing as it recognizes
00:17:01.060 the worth and the potential of the human being. But the equality that socialists believe in is not
00:17:06.940 just equality of worth, though they would probably agree on that. They'd probably say that all people
00:17:11.460 are created equal, but they believe in equality of outcome. Socialists see any gap in success or any
00:17:18.840 gap in earnings as inherently unjust and a product of an oppressive system. So for example, and this is a lot
00:17:25.920 of people on the left, not just socialists, but they would see the gender wage gap, which has far more
00:17:31.740 to do with choices and what women choose to do with their lives than it does any kind of system 1.00
00:17:38.700 whatsoever. They would say, well, that is indicative of some kind of oppression when that's not actually
00:17:43.860 true, but they see any and all gaps as indicative of some kind of oppressive system. Rarely, rarely will
00:17:51.500 you hear a socialist account for individual choices or chance. If one group is on average poorer than
00:17:58.080 another group, it is not because, according to a socialist, of irresponsibility, but because of an
00:18:03.560 unjust system that is keeping them down. So that is always their thought. That's always their go-to.
00:18:09.920 This is why socialists want to eliminate hierarchy as much as possible, which is why they say they want
00:18:16.260 power in the hands of the people, in the hands of democracy, in the hands of who they call workers,
00:18:21.840 which is a Marxist term. They believe that heavy taxation, wealth redistribution, the elimination
00:18:27.200 of profit and private property will accomplish that because in order to have equality of outcome,
00:18:33.520 which they believe is perfect social justice accomplished, you have to take away from the 0.98
00:18:39.620 haves and give it to the have-nots so that everyone has the same amount. Equal mediocrity. They would 0.88
00:18:45.980 rather have equal mediocrity than have these large disparities between some people doing really
00:18:52.540 well and some people not doing well at all. But as we've already discussed, that idea is inherently
00:18:58.500 unjust. The idea of taking almost all of what someone has earned and giving it to those who have not
00:19:04.720 earned it is theft. And the reality is, again, equality of outcome can only be accomplished through severe
00:19:10.700 government regulation to ensure that all those who work harder than those who do and all those who work
00:19:17.380 harder than those who don't work very hard at all have their profits taken away from them and and used to
00:19:24.820 take care of the people who are not working as effectively and as efficiently as they are. This is one of the
00:19:31.940 ways this is one of the many ways that socialism does not account for human nature. Humans are naturally
00:19:38.620 competitive. We have this natural bent towards reaping what we sow. This is not a western social
00:19:44.980 construct. This has been true in every society throughout all of history. We feel entitled to
00:19:51.180 the fruit of our labor and we do not take well to people stealing the fruit of our labor, all of it
00:19:56.240 almost, and giving it to those who did not work for it. Humans and Christians especially have shown
00:20:02.020 a great capacity for voluntary generosity towards those who need it. But whenever our profits and
00:20:07.460 property are confiscated in the name of forced compassion, which by definition is not compassion
00:20:12.580 at all, we don't react well, which is precisely why, as we'll get to, socialism has been such a horrific
00:20:18.860 failure every time it has been tried. And yet this idea of equal outcomes by repressing those who have
00:20:27.220 in favor of those who don't have is the keystone of socialism. And here's why. So socialism, most of you
00:20:33.560 probably know, is the brainchild of Karl Marx. He was a German philosopher in the 19th century. He wrote
00:20:40.560 a book called The Communist Manifesto, which outlined the problems with the bourgeoisie, which is the elite
00:20:46.000 and the evils of capitalism. This is by far the most praised piece of literature among socialists. So
00:20:52.440 whenever they mock you or scoff at you for comparing socialism to communism or observing that socialism
00:20:59.780 leads to communism, remind them that their favorite political book is literally called
00:21:05.800 The Communist Manifesto. OK, so there's really not much of a separation between socialism and
00:21:13.140 communism. Socialism is always supposed to lead to communism. If you read any part of The Communist
00:21:19.460 Manifesto, even if you just read some of the quotes online, you will see that this is exactly where
00:21:24.240 the socialists of today, where the Bernie Sanders and the AOCs and even the Elizabeth Warrens of today
00:21:28.820 are getting their ideas and inspiration. So here's how Karl Marx saw history in his modern world.
00:21:34.160 He says,
00:21:34.840 The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles. Free man and slave,
00:21:40.420 patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild master and journeyman, and a word oppressor and oppressed,
00:21:46.280 stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight
00:21:51.480 that each time ended, either in the revolutionary reconstitution of society at large,
00:21:56.300 or in the common ruin of the contending classes. Everything in Marx's mind was about the oppressor
00:22:04.040 versus the oppressed. That's how he saw society organized, and he believed that communism would
00:22:09.320 bring an end to that. He hated capitalism. He hated free trade. He hated private property.
00:22:15.900 He saw all of this as evil, as turning men into greedy scrooges who stomped on his fellow man. And you
00:22:20.940 can also see, if you listen to my, I think it's episode 99, if you listen to that episode about
00:22:25.420 black liberation theology, you can see where they get a lot of their ideas. It's from Karl Marx and
00:22:32.600 these collectivist ideologies. Everything in Marx's mind was about this dichotomy. Everything was viewed
00:22:43.780 through the lens of oppression. And this is where, again, we have to note that socialism and today's
00:22:50.960 version of social justice cannot be separated. They go hand in hand. It is all about the elimination
00:22:57.060 of differences between groups by pushing down those whom the left sees as the oppressor and lifting up
00:23:04.720 the ones the left sees as the oppressed, primarily through an economic system that taxes the wealthy into
00:23:10.460 obscurity, but also through social constructs like intersectionality that invade our public discourse
00:23:16.420 and the messages that we see in the media, et cetera. We have discussed this many times, this idea of
00:23:22.620 intersectionality that people are defined by their various intersection points, which are skin color,
00:23:28.360 religion, gender, sexual orientation, et cetera, and how those points correspond to a particular level of
00:23:35.400 oppression, according to the left. The more intersection points you have, they say, the more
00:23:40.800 credibility and value that you have. So any opinion that you have or view that you hold is weighed against
00:23:46.260 how intersectional you are to many people on the left. Straight white men, of course, are the least
00:23:51.700 intersectional. Thus, they are the least oppressed. So if a white man is a conservative, for example, it is because
00:23:58.200 he is a straight white man, not because he has those ideas. If a white woman is conservative, it's because she is 0.71
00:24:04.280 white, not because she really has those ideas. Oh, and also because she's a woman who is a conservative,
00:24:10.260 it's probably also because she is oppressed and brainwashed by the patriarchy. Same goes for black 1.00
00:24:18.020 conservatives, for immigrant conservatives, for Muslim conservatives. It's because they say you have 0.99
00:24:22.940 been oppressed. And so you have been brainwashed by white people, not because you think your own 0.57
00:24:27.940 thoughts or have your own values, because if you really thought for yourself, they would say you would be
00:24:32.920 a socialist and a communist. Because these people believe that it is not conservative versus liberal,
00:24:40.800 just like Karl Marx, they believe that it is the oppressed versus the oppressor. They see anyone who
00:24:48.300 disagrees with them as as on the side of the oppressor. So it doesn't make sense to them when
00:24:53.860 someone who is black or someone who is gay or someone who is an immigrant or someone who is Muslim
00:24:58.160 would be on the conservative side, would be against them. They see those people as on the side of the
00:25:02.460 oppressor. And the only reason an oppressed person in their mind would be on the side of the oppressor
00:25:06.540 is if they are brainwashed. And so that's why they just can't deal with people who are minorities who 0.99
00:25:12.640 don't agree with them. People like me are, you know, a white person, a white woman, a white man. They can
00:25:17.920 just brush off as just being racist, of just being as a part of the oppressive white supremacy. That's why
00:25:26.200 they disagree with them. So they don't actually have to contend with any ideas. And you see that a lot
00:25:31.320 in our debates in our discussions today. Just like Karl Marx, they believe that the only way for the
00:25:37.000 oppressed to be free is through socialism and or communism. So if you're against socialism,
00:25:42.800 then again, you are on the side of those who want to oppress people. So how do they decide,
00:25:50.800 you ask, who is being oppressed? Typically in a very superficial way. Who has been the most poor
00:25:58.080 and or who has been the most discriminated against? And I say and or because this is complicated on the
00:26:04.720 intersectionality scale. If you haven't noticed, everything is extremely subjective because it's not
00:26:10.960 just who has been the most discriminated against. For example, the Jewish people have been discriminated
00:26:15.700 against and marginalized and brutalized throughout history. And the left does not have a high view of
00:26:21.140 Jews. You'll notice they really only care about violence against Jews when it's done at the hands 0.91
00:26:26.700 of a white supremacist. If it's a Palestinian terror group like Hamas, they don't really have anything
00:26:31.080 to say about it. And in fact, they're going to stand up for Palestine. That's because to the left,
00:26:35.480 Jews rank lower than non-Jewish white people. Even or even though Jews rank lower than non-Jewish white 0.81
00:26:42.960 people on the intersectionality scale, they still rank higher than Muslims in Palestine. Why? 0.99
00:26:49.600 Because traditionally, the Jewish people have been successful.
00:26:53.100 They have pulled themselves up by their bootstraps. They have, in general, been well-educated. They have
00:26:59.780 been financially successful. They have refused to bow down to victimhood. So even though they have been
00:27:06.740 traditionally oppressed throughout history to the intersectional and even socialist left, they are not
00:27:14.160 given as much credit. They are not given as much compassion and as much sympathy as Muslims because Jewish 1.00
00:27:20.320 people, probably to a lot of people on the left, are just too white. They are just too successful
00:27:26.780 to have a lot of compassion for, which is why they always will go against Jews if it's Jews versus 0.91
00:27:33.820 Muslims, but not a Jew versus a Christian white person. It's just crazy. It's really hard to grapple 0.76
00:27:41.260 with. But once you realize that this is how they think, a lot of the things that they say and do make a lot
00:27:46.500 of sense, or they don't make a lot of sense, but at least you know where they're coming from.
00:27:51.620 So American leftists who buy into this oppressed versus oppressor dynamic claim to be
00:27:56.400 woke, but the reality is they actually see things through a very narrow Western lens. They look
00:28:03.420 exclusively, really, on how groups have fared in the United States and not on a global scale. So,
00:28:11.380 for example, they count Christians as privileged in America, as mostly whites, when the reality is
00:28:17.380 Christians are persecuted far more than any other religious group in the world, and most Christians
00:28:23.560 are not whites. And Christianity did not start in the West. It most certainly did not start in the
00:28:28.800 United States. But this, again, reflects the ideology of Karl Marx. He hated Christianity. He called Jews 0.99
00:28:35.560 hucksters. He really actually loathed most religions, but primarily loathed any group that he's
00:28:41.360 saw as an oppressor. When you realize that this is how that a lot of these leftists, not all, but a lot
00:28:47.980 of these leftists see the world stemming from Karl Marx and his collaborator Friedrich Engels. A lot of
00:28:53.660 what they do, like I said, it doesn't make sense, but it does. Everything is viewed not through the lens
00:28:59.340 of what is true and what is not, but what group is this person a part of and how oppressed have they
00:29:06.560 been? And that's how I'm going to figure out who is to blame or how much sympathy or credit to give.
00:29:11.360 That is why when anyone criticizes, for example, Ilhan Omar for saying that Israel has hypnotized the
00:29:20.700 world or that Republicans' only support for Israel is because of the Benjamins or that AIPAC is
00:29:27.420 controlling Republican politicians or for sympathizing with and defending men from Minnesota who tried to
00:29:32.840 join ISIS or defending Hamas or trivializing 9-11, if we criticize her for any of this stuff,
00:29:37.680 it's because we are Islamophobic. So if we criticize a Muslim person for saying something
00:29:42.960 derogatory towards Jewish people, it is because we are Islamophobic, not because they are anti-Semitic.
00:29:48.020 Why? Because of this crazy intersectionality scale and who they see as more oppressed and more
00:29:52.820 privileged. So if you criticize Rashida Tlaib for saying that she feels a calming feeling when she
00:29:57.900 thinks about the Holocaust because of her erroneous belief that Palestinians were the savior of the
00:30:03.520 Jewish people rather than aiding and abetting Nazis, it's because you're an Islamophobe, 0.97
00:30:08.760 not because her comments were ridiculous and anti-Semitic. If you criticize AOC for the many,
00:30:14.820 many uneducated comments that she has made, it's because you are a racist, sexist, 0.94
00:30:19.360 and you hate women of color. That's why. It's not because she has anything wrong to say.
00:30:25.820 Uh, this is also why personal responsibility is really not something that's ever going to be
00:30:30.940 emphasized by the socialist left because every group who has not succeeded, uh, is seen as
00:30:37.120 systemically oppressed, not irresponsible as we've already covered. So now we see how this social
00:30:42.560 aspect of socialism really goes hand in hand with the economic aspect of socialism. Socialism sees
00:30:47.940 poverty as never, never the fault of people who are poor, but a consequence of oppression from the
00:30:53.520 people at the top, which is why they think it necessary to take the power and the wealth and
00:30:58.340 the property of the haves and hand it to the have not. So they do not see someone, for example,
00:31:03.460 like my parents who, uh, were raised poor, who were very poor when they got married, had to work
00:31:08.600 themselves, uh, through college, had to really pull themselves up and to make it work. And who couldn't
00:31:14.240 even afford a new pair of shoes when they first got married for my dad to wear to work. They don't see a
00:31:19.980 story like that. And then my dad, you know, both of them becoming successful entrepreneurs and being
00:31:24.980 able to make a good life for my brothers and me, they don't see that as a story of personal
00:31:29.260 responsibility. They see that as a story of privilege. They see that as a story of benefiting
00:31:34.000 from certain systems that are kinder to white people than to people who are in other groups.
00:31:39.200 They don't see that as the consequence of choices. They see that as the consequence of a system.
00:31:43.860 And the same thing goes with poverty. Now we do know just from a logical experiential perspective,
00:31:49.460 like we do understand that bad luck happens or maybe not luck from a theological term,
00:31:55.940 but bad things happen. Bad circumstances happen that are outside of people's control. Not everyone
00:32:00.760 who is poor, it hasn't always been a product of bad choices. Sometimes you are born into extremely
00:32:07.200 unfortunate circumstances in which you could not crawl out of because you were 14 years old and you
00:32:12.480 were left without parents, whatever it is. Not everyone who is poor is a product of bad choices
00:32:17.880 or is a product of your own bad choices anyway. And not everyone who is rich has had to go from
00:32:23.080 nothing to something. We know that that's true. There is chance, there are circumstances that people
00:32:28.140 are born into that are inherently more privileged than the circumstances that other people are born
00:32:32.460 into. That of course is true. But the socialist doesn't take that kind of nuanced look. They see
00:32:37.920 every kind of discrepancy, not as a consequence of choices, but as a consequence of some
00:32:42.400 kind of systemic oppression, which is why they justify saying, well, the government's got to step
00:32:48.000 in and do something about this to make sure that all outcomes are equal because anyone at the top
00:32:52.580 has exploited people at the bottom to get there. When of course that is not always true.
00:32:58.260 So let us talk about a little bit more about the background of socialism. There are two main branches
00:33:04.100 of thought within the socialist ideology. First is the belief that everything except personal items,
00:33:09.460 such as clothing, should be public property. So an example of this would be that of Sir Thomas Moore
00:33:14.720 writing in 1516, Utopia. Other socialists would believe that the only way that society is supposed
00:33:21.780 to control the economy is through property and other resources. So maybe not quite as extreme.
00:33:28.060 In this case, centralists in socialism would say that the state should be a central authority
00:33:33.420 but it should be in control of the resources of that specific society. This was the case in the
00:33:41.560 Soviet Union. And then you have people in the more decentralized camp of socialism that believe
00:33:46.780 that these decisions should be made at the lowest possible level of government. So state or local.
00:33:52.640 Ultimately, these decisions would be made by a populist decision. So that's what one side of this
00:33:57.640 of the socialist spectrum believes. But it's important to note that this kind of revolution or transition would
00:34:02.460 still take a powerful central government to force it to make it happen, even if it were to be more of
00:34:08.920 a populist socialist movement, which is part of why socialism has never really worked long term.
00:34:16.660 Marxism, Leninism tried in the Soviet Union, but failed. People were starving, were persecuted,
00:34:21.740 were oppressed by the tyranny of the Soviet government. India tried state socialism as well as Sweden
00:34:26.720 with democratic socialism. And in Germany, we all know how national socialism went with the
00:34:32.380 Nazi movement. Of course, you probably know Nazi stands for national socialist Chinese. The Chinese 0.55
00:34:37.720 have employed communism and still employs communism today. North Korea is a socialist regime. And I think
00:34:44.640 we can deduce how that's working out for people who have died from parasites after being forced to use
00:34:49.200 human manure to fertilize their crops. Venezuela has been under socialist rule. And people are, of course,
00:34:55.540 as you probably know, are dying of hunger and are still fighting to officially get out from under
00:35:01.900 Maduro's tyrannical rule. Socialism has had loud dissidents over the years who have pushed back against
00:35:08.860 the tyranny of socialism. So you've got Hungary, you've got Czechoslovakia, you've got Poland,
00:35:14.880 you have China, you have Cuba. That is why many countries who tried socialism realized that they had to
00:35:21.660 adopt at least characteristics of capitalism in order to survive or characteristics of the free market to
00:35:28.320 survive. Socialism in Sweden failed. So now they have a welfare state that A, has a fair flat tax rate of
00:35:35.720 60 percent and B, is funded by the free market. So everyone is taxed at a high flat rate. They get free
00:35:43.640 health care, they get free education, but there is a low corporate tax rate so that businesses and
00:35:48.480 individuals are still able to make a significant profit. In fact, the leaders of the Scandinavian
00:35:54.000 countries have publicly corrected Bernie Sanders, who claims that they are socialist countries. They've
00:36:00.240 said, no, we're actually not socialist countries. So the means of production in these Scandinavian
00:36:05.440 countries are mostly in the hands of the citizens and the businesses that they work for. Denmark, for
00:36:13.040 example, doesn't even have a minimum wage law. They are consistently ranked as one of the top free
00:36:17.760 market economies in the world. So these Scandinavian countries are not socialist. And even in using
00:36:23.640 the free market, but having a welfare state, a lot of these countries are still under significant
00:36:27.980 pressure. A lot of people say that even where they are using the free market, but taxing people so high
00:36:33.100 and providing for so many people who are dependent on the state, millions of people who are dependent on
00:36:37.840 the federal government, that it's not going to last very long, that it's eventually going to crash and
00:36:43.340 burn. So even that they're not a socialist state, but their welfare state, even that probably won't
00:36:48.680 last forever. China also realized that they weren't going to become an economic superpower without
00:36:53.460 capitalism. That's why they have special economic zones. These are zones where foreign and domestic
00:36:58.340 trade and investments are done without interference from the central government. They offer tax and
00:37:04.240 business incentives to attract foreign investment in technology. There was even an attempt kind of at
00:37:10.000 socialism in the 19th century. There was an English philanthropist named Robert Owen, who launched a
00:37:16.240 new harmony on the banks of the Wabash River in Indiana. Not too long after the experiment, harmony
00:37:23.600 collapsed and Owen went home. So it doesn't have a great track record. Socialism, bottom line, it just
00:37:30.560 doesn't work. Now, if you talk to a socialist, they'll say it's never truly been tried. Or they will say
00:37:36.680 that while it's happening in the Scandinavian countries, well, one, socialism has been tried
00:37:42.700 many times and it has failed. And socialism does not characterize the Scandinavian countries. Like I
00:37:49.840 said, they are welfare seats. So let's discuss the difference in welfare and socialism. So the idea of
00:37:55.260 welfare existed long before the idea of socialism. In 1601, the Parliament of England enacted something
00:38:00.860 called the Elizabethan Poor Law of 1601. It authorized government provision for the poor residing in
00:38:07.240 local parishes, established a system of obligatory financing outside the church. Early America instilled
00:38:14.800 this kind of principle as well. There was a form of welfare set up only for those who were young and
00:38:19.660 vulnerable or old and vulnerable or who were disabled. No able-bodied person qualified for public 1.00
00:38:25.660 assistance during this time. There was a big shift in welfare during the Great Depression. FDR
00:38:31.360 implemented his New Deal, which were, of course, a set of economic programs meant to provide relief
00:38:37.680 for families who were hit hard by the Depression. In 1935, the Social Security Act established a national
00:38:43.660 system of old age insurance for retired workers, benefits for victims of industrial accidents,
00:38:49.780 unemployment insurance, aid for dependent mothers and children, the blind, the physically handicapped,
00:38:54.920 and then you probably know about the 1960s when LBJ launched the Great Society. This had an aim to
00:39:01.300 eliminate poverty and also racial injustice. And during this period, new spinning programs were
00:39:07.080 launched that also addressed education, medical care, urban problems, rural poverty and transportation.
00:39:13.300 Medicare and Medicaid were products of this time. The Great Society really looked to expand FDR's New
00:39:20.100 Deal, but the New Deal was in response to a severe economic crisis. And so the Great Society was
00:39:25.120 something different. The Great Society occurred when the American economy was actually booming.
00:39:29.740 Everything was growing and flourishing due to what, by the way, due to Kennedy's tax cuts,
00:39:36.120 which slashed the top marginal tax rate by 20 percent. This resulted in the GNP rising,
00:39:41.660 the unemployment rate falling dramatically, and the average income increasing. So that was from the tax
00:39:46.520 cuts. Just want to make that clear. This was an effort to end poverty, to end injustice. But even
00:39:53.460 if the intentions were good, the results were not very good. So since then, we have spent over 20
00:40:00.300 trillion, 20 trillion dollars on these entitlement programs. So even if you spend a million dollars a
00:40:06.420 day for 2,000 years, you still wouldn't be out of 20 trillion dollars. That is how much money that is.
00:40:13.740 We have spent more than 20 trillion dollars on welfare programs that were originally meant to
00:40:18.540 create a level playing field and ensure people had opportunity, but it didn't really solve anything.
00:40:23.940 It didn't actually change the poverty rate. It didn't stop disparity. And many of these programs
00:40:30.180 just kept growing. In 2016 alone, we spent 2.7 trillion dollars on various welfare systems.
00:40:38.500 These specifically include Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, unemployment compensation,
00:40:43.800 and veterans benefits. According to Pew, more than two-thirds of our yearly spending goes to welfare
00:40:49.420 or entitlement programs. That's in comparison to 15.3 percent of total spending for national defense,
00:40:55.620 net spending to government debt, 6.1 percent, and education aid at 3 percent. That means that around
00:41:02.240 6 percent goes towards things like infrastructure, national parks, foreign aid, and various other
00:41:08.960 items. So that's a large portion of our tax money. Now, all of this, welfare, like I said, different
00:41:15.820 than socialism, but certainly over the past half century, a little bit more than that, has primed
00:41:20.700 the pump for socialism. Economically, people have come to expect to be taken care of. From the Great
00:41:27.640 Depression to now, welfare has gone from relief to people who absolutely need it, who are getting back
00:41:32.760 on their feet, to entitlement, whether or not you're going to work ever. People feel entitled
00:41:38.720 to their Social Security, to their Medicare, to their Medicaid, to their unemployment benefits. And in many
00:41:45.320 cases, it's more lucrative not to work than to work because of just how much the government will take
00:41:51.580 care of you. So Bernie Sanders being able to run and almost win the Democratic nomination in 2016
00:41:57.760 tells you just how far we have come and just how far we have shifted, really just within the past 10
00:42:04.060 years even. Welfare wasn't thought of as socialism originally because in the case of the New Deal,
00:42:11.040 it was a desperate measure called for by a desperate time. And it was meant to help people who were trying
00:42:17.940 to work in the case of the Great Society. Welfare was fueled by American wealth by that hard work.
00:42:23.220 But socialism and how we view welfare today negates the need for individualism. It negates the need for
00:42:31.660 entrepreneurship, for hard work, because everyone is going to be taken care of no matter what.
00:42:36.360 That was never the intention of the American welfare program. But it has been the unintended
00:42:42.140 consequence of thinking people can be freed from oppression and freed from poverty by just giving
00:42:47.840 them more money without really any expectations. But it wasn't just economic. They weren't just
00:42:53.800 economic policies like the welfare programs that made the way for the popularity of socialism. Because
00:42:59.040 remember, a major part of socialism is its social aspect, is social justice. And this idea of social
00:43:06.880 justice, this desire for equal outcomes across socioeconomic classes, races, genders, was championed by
00:43:13.560 none other than Barack Obama. We saw this in his domestic dealings as he pitted all white cops against
00:43:19.360 all black kids, as he belittled business owners by insisting that they didn't build what they had when
00:43:25.940 he demonized the wealthy by saying that at some point you just got enough money by targeting Christian
00:43:32.140 conservatives using the IRS. We saw this in his foreign dealings, his well-known apology tour for how
00:43:39.760 American strength he purported has negatively manifested itself throughout the world.
00:43:46.280 Barack Obama's worldview is that of the oppressed versus the oppressor. And those who have, in the
00:43:52.480 leftist mindset, been the subject of oppression need to be lifted up. Those who have traditionally
00:43:58.200 been oppressed need to be brought low. And we know that some of his mentors were affected by,
00:44:04.560 well, I don't really want to go throughout this whole lineage because it's a long story.
00:44:07.780 So if you listen to episode 99, you will also see how Barack Obama was affected by Marxism as
00:44:13.820 well. He demonstrated this through the vehicle of identity politics, which says that if you are this
00:44:19.260 race, you have to vote this way or believe this. If you are that gender, you have to vote that way or 0.99
00:44:24.860 believe that. This creates tribalism, which stokes resentment, all of which is fueled by
00:44:29.960 intersectionality, which all come part and parcel with socialism, as we see in the work of Karl
00:44:36.440 Marx. It is all about pitting the perceived oppressed versus the perceived oppressor.
00:44:42.400 During Barack Obama's presidency, we see in a 2017 Pew research study called Polarization in Politics
00:44:48.660 that Republicans and Democrats became more divided than they've ever been, with Democrats moving to
00:44:53.460 the left on almost every issue for racism to immigration to welfare and Republicans' views changing
00:44:59.560 much less. As of 2017, there were fewer people in the middle than had ever been. A dramatic shift
00:45:07.080 away from the middle and especially to the far left came while Barack Obama was in office. This study
00:45:11.720 was in 2017. You cannot blame this on Donald Trump. I'm not saying Donald Trump is the great reconciler,
00:45:17.020 but you cannot blame the level of division that we have and that we have had for the past few years
00:45:23.280 on Donald Trump. This started happening for the most part under Barack Obama. Yes,
00:45:28.000 there was always division. We've always had division in our country. I mean, we fought a war
00:45:31.940 north versus the south. There was a lot of division in the 1960s, but the modern division,
00:45:37.900 the division that we now have, began cultivating and really festering under Barack Obama.
00:45:43.740 Leftist economic policies that have lingered for at least the past half century, coupled with the
00:45:49.220 social shift to the left over the last at least two decades, has created the climate for the embracing
00:45:56.520 of socialism in the United States, especially among young people who just don't know better and quite
00:46:01.900 frankly are fed this postmodern garbage from their professors. More millennials and Generation Z identify
00:46:10.720 as socialists or at least view socialism positively than any other generation. More millennials voted for
00:46:16.800 Bernie Sanders in the 2016 primaries than voted for Trump or Clinton combined. Most millennials,
00:46:22.700 quite frankly, quite frankly, I think I just said quite frankly, I just said it again, don't know what
00:46:28.240 socialism is. What they usually mean is that they want more welfare. They think they want to be more
00:46:34.460 like the Scandinavian countries, but they have no idea what the difference is between the free market
00:46:39.740 and the free market economy with a high tax rate and a free health care system and that and socialism.
00:46:48.120 So if we tried to make our economy function the way Scandinavian countries do, most of those on the 1.00
00:46:55.040 socialist left would freak out. Like if we implemented a flat tax rate, if we eliminated the minimum wage
00:47:00.820 laws the way that they have in Denmark, they would say that's absolutely heartless. They wouldn't let us
00:47:04.540 do that. Also, if we cracked down on immigration the way that these Scandinavian countries do, if we 0.92
00:47:11.160 encouraged a sense of nationalist pride the way that they do, they would be against it. So I don't think
00:47:16.260 that they really want to be like Scandinavia. These people who say the Scandinavian countries are these
00:47:20.420 beacons of socialism. So really, I think that a lot of millennials who say that they want socialism
00:47:25.020 don't really know what they want. They think that these offers by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren
00:47:29.980 for free health care, for free college, of course, that affects the younger generations more than
00:47:33.960 millennials. They say, yes, that sounds fair. That sounds good. Let's get that 1%. Let's stick it to the
00:47:40.520 man and get his stuff. What they don't realize is that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are both
00:47:48.320 part of the 1%. They spent so much time demonizing the 1%. They are a part of the 1%. You would think
00:47:54.080 that Bernie Sanders would be able to give up at least two of his three houses or one of his three
00:47:58.300 houses and give a little bit more to the government than what he does right now or give a little bit
00:48:03.480 more to charity than he does right now. If he really thought the 1% was so evil, no one's forcing him to be
00:48:08.620 in the 1%. He can give away enough money so that he's no longer in it. But of course, they want
00:48:13.460 socialism for thee, but not for me or socialism for thee, but not for them. Same goes for AOC, of 0.94
00:48:22.320 course, who though she in many ways embodies the American dream going from being a bartender to a 1.00
00:48:28.460 congresswoman in the matter of a couple years, she doesn't think that other people can make it like 1.00
00:48:32.580 she does. She doesn't think that other people can make the same choices that she has. And in fact,
00:48:37.540 if you look at AOC's Green New Deal, it's clear that she doesn't think anyone should have to take
00:48:42.840 responsibility. Her deal promises economic security for those who are unable or unwilling to work.
00:48:49.900 And that's another key part of socialism, one that is unfortunately really attractive to a lot
00:48:55.060 of young people. The belief that there is no inherent morality or value in you working. You should not be
00:49:03.000 forced to work if you don't want to. That is why many on the side of the left are pushing this
00:49:07.320 universal basic income and are pushing for programs that would totally take care of all of your needs.
00:49:12.920 You should be provided for whether you work or not. That, of course, is the goal of socialism,
00:49:19.420 to force people into equal mediocrity and allow the government to take care of you. Remember that the
00:49:25.140 government does not give you provision without taking freedom in return. So the more provision the
00:49:31.740 government gives, the bigger it gets and the less free all of us are, which explains the revolutions
00:49:37.160 that happen consistently against socialism like the one going on right now in Venezuela.
00:49:41.720 So I know this is a long podcast. We're almost done. As Christians, how should we think of this?
00:49:48.580 There are a lot of people who say I've seen a lot of people say this on Twitter that the early
00:49:54.400 church embraced socialism. No, the early church did not embrace socialism. The early church is described
00:50:02.120 in Acts 2, engaged in voluntary distribution of their goods to meet the needs of their community.
00:50:09.120 Their giving was out of a willing, cheerful heart, which the Bible says is the only kind of giving that God
00:50:15.620 loves. This was not forced redistribution. This was charity. And it was given to meet the needs
00:50:23.240 of their own community. Emphasis on needs and their own community. So they weren't helping those who
00:50:30.900 didn't just, who just didn't want to work. They weren't helping those who were unwilling to work.
00:50:35.700 They were helping those who needed it in their local church out of the love of Christ, which compelled
00:50:41.040 them to such kindness. This kind of love must be uncoerced, especially it shouldn't be coerced by
00:50:49.440 bureaucrats who don't have the needs of the church in mind at all. Usually by bureaucrats who don't
00:50:55.340 even see the need to protect the vulnerable like unborn babies. They are not to be the stewards of
00:51:01.760 all of our money. This does not mean, of course, that we don't pay taxes. We do. The Bible says
00:51:07.160 render to Caesar what is Caesar's. But what follows that? We render to God what is God's. So render to
00:51:14.040 Caesar what is Caesar's and render to God's what is God's. To God belongs our full generosity. To God
00:51:20.960 belongs our profit and our property. Also, rendering to Caesar what is Caesar's is not approval of
00:51:28.660 tyranny. We should ask the question, what is Caesar's? What should be Caesar's? And in a democratic
00:51:35.480 republic in which we now live, we have a say in what should be Caesar's and what should not be Caesar's.
00:51:41.520 And we should we should not say we would be stupid to say that the majority of our profits and our
00:51:48.880 property belongs to Caesar. Why? Because Caesar is not a good steward of our money and Caesar is not a
00:51:55.620 good caretaker of our people. Look no further than the VA for that. I'm just going to say when I was
00:52:01.340 saying that little monologue just then, I reminded myself of Gretchen Wieners from Mean Girls when she
00:52:06.440 goes off about Caesar. I won't get into that. Some of you maybe not even you might not even get that
00:52:11.320 reference. Anyway, so the Bible speaks to the legitimacy of private property as early as the
00:52:18.140 Ten Commandments through thou shall not steal and thou shall not covet. You shall not steal because
00:52:24.700 what someone else has is not yours and you should not covet because what someone else has isn't supposed
00:52:31.280 to be yours and even wanting it to be yours according to God is a sin. So the Bible legitimizes 0.97
00:52:38.900 private property early on. The Bible also makes clear in the creation account that work is expected
00:52:44.420 of and necessary for the flourishing of the individual. Work existed before the fall, before
00:52:52.660 sin entered the world. It was not a consequence of the fall. I think a lot of people think that work
00:52:57.800 was a consequence of the fall. It was not. In a sinless world, before the fruit was tasted,
00:53:03.000 the forbidden fruit. Before Adam and Eve hid themselves from God, Adam was given a job.
00:53:08.600 He was given responsibility. Work is inherently good. It is inherently moral. That is precisely why
00:53:14.800 when people do not work, they become purposeless. They become despondent, often depressed and suicidal.
00:53:21.960 Their mind and their character atrophies. This is part of why unlimited welfare is immoral and
00:53:28.460 unbiblical. That is part of why socialism is immoral and unbiblical. So here's a really good 0.99
00:53:34.720 quote from John Piper on socialism that I think sums this all up. Socialism borrows the compassionate
00:53:42.240 aims of Christianity and meeting people's needs while rejecting the Christian expectation that this
00:53:47.760 compassion not be forced or coerced. Socialism, therefore, gets its attractiveness at certain points
00:53:53.920 in history where people are drawn to the entitlements that socialism brings and where people
00:53:58.440 are ignorant or forgetful of the coercion and the force required to implement it and whether or
00:54:03.640 not that coercion might in fact backfire and result in greater poverty or drab uniformity or worse.
00:54:10.740 The abuse of the coercion as we saw in the murderous states like USSR and Cambodia. So I think that he 0.87
00:54:18.620 summarizes the problems with socialism from a Christian perspective, from a biblical perspective, really well.
00:54:24.720 So to conclude all of this, a socialism is at best a well-intentioned ideology aimed at economic and
00:54:34.600 social equality. And at worst, which is the only end of the spectrum that we've actually seen manifested
00:54:40.640 throughout history and in the modern day, is a coercive, unjust, and unbiblical system that disincentivizes
00:54:49.740 work eliminates generosity and controls every aspect of the populace. And it is the exact opposite of
00:54:57.840 what needs to happen in the United States. Every aspect of your life will be controlled. If you think
00:55:02.780 free speech, if you think freedom of religious expression, if you think the sanctity of life,
00:55:07.940 if you think any of the rights that are recognized in the Bill of Rights, in the Constitution,
00:55:13.480 if you think any of those are protected in a socialist society, you are crazy. When we give
00:55:19.500 the government the full power to take care of us, we also give the government full authority to take
00:55:25.600 over our lives. And that's exactly what happens in a socialist society. Do you think Christians, 0.97
00:55:31.960 do you think the church is going to fare well in a socialist society? Well, of course,
00:55:36.020 the gospel is going to thrive no matter what. The true church thrives on the margins. It's going to be
00:55:41.180 okay when we are persecuted. But do you actually think that that's better for the least of these?
00:55:46.740 Do you actually think that it's better for your community to be completely controlled and coerced
00:55:52.820 by a central government through socialism in the name of forced compassion, which, as I've already
00:55:57.740 said in this podcast, by definition is not compassion at all? Remember, we are the last hope. And as Ronald
00:56:03.860 Reagan said, we are always one generation away from eliminating liberty. That's a paraphrase.
00:56:10.740 We are always one generation away from giving up our freedom. Socialism might be attracted to a
00:56:16.980 bunch of lazy people. And I'll give them the benefit of the doubt, maybe some empathetic people
00:56:20.700 too, but it doesn't work. It leads to suffering. It leads to mediocrity. And it is not the future I
00:56:28.160 want or you should want for your children. So like I said, this is not going to be an unbiased podcast
00:56:35.180 episode. I have quite a few thoughts about socialism, but I hope you learned something. If you have any
00:56:40.420 thoughts you would like to send me, please feel free to email me. Leave me a five-star review. If you
00:56:44.580 like my podcast, subscribe on YouTube and on social media, if you so desire, and I will see you soon.