EVERY LITTLE SAVER FOR SELF IS AT BEST A LITTLE NABAL
This is in response to, "The Coming Class War; an Essay," on the Unfunded Liabilities and the Coming Class War blog.
Now, I don't agree with the first premises of the blog author.
The capitalists who will supposedly pay for the so-called "unfunded" entitlements include the banksters; however the poor too pay taxes, and the poor too work for those who have amassed more for self in the spirit of greed, violence, and/or other forms of depravity. The whole system right now is based upon the banksters. They run the show. Remove them, and evil will still seek the path of least resistance.
Now, certain people calling themselves libertarians and anarcho-capitalists, especially of the Ludwig von Mises ilk conjure up a vocabulary or a set of jargon where the banksters are not "real" capitalists, which is pure baloney.
They use the term crony capitalists (which I understand) as if to say that if only the whole world would see their light and be non-crony capitalists then that would be the best of all possible worlds given what, human nature? If human nature is incapable of rising to the level of Jesus, then why is it capable of foregoing banksterism in the Ludwig von Mises camp? It's inconsistent thinking.
The entitlement called Social Security was put into place also via a marketplace because laissez-faire capitalism's invisible hand is a monster that would eternally delay taking care but rather rape others forever to build fleeting mansions for self apart from the whole of the family of humanity. It's fratricide. It's leaving your brother half dead lying by the side of the road. You've read what Jesus said about the Good Samaritan. Do you disagree with Jesus? If you disagree with him on that, I have no use for you. I won't starve you or torture you, but you aren't glorified.
The market is a democracy. Well so too is the political marketplace of ideas. The so-called American Founding Fathers, often lauded by the Ludwig von Mises types (Austrian School of economics – a bunch of anti-Christs to a man and woman regardless of what any of them claim) when it suits them when they are attempting to lure others in before they switch the product, created a marketplace called the American political and governmental system. Convince people, and you "win." Sell them your ideas, and they'll buy them and follow you. Of course, the United States was born in violence and coercion.
So, why is competition sacrosanct where Ludwig von Mises's personal estate and business enterprise is concerned but wicked otherwise. Look, Ludwig von Mises and all the rest of that crowd have as their first principle self-centeredness. I agree that coercion is wrong, but I say it's wrong as a system all the time. They say it's wrong up to the point that they want to use it and when their ideology doesn't sell. Then they'll form violent vigilante groups (statism actually just under other connotations) to murder the democratic socialists because the ideology of those socialists is coercive.
Enough said, right?
Yes, that author hates unions, but what about corporations formed by the ultra-rich. Why is one union not okay whereas the other is? It's pure hypocrisy. Both are formed on self – one more than the other. Neither is the best way for humanity. He may agree, but obviously it's not his thrust. He's vastly more anti-union, as in worker, than he is against Big Business. Unions were in reaction to ultra-greed. Let's not put the cart before the horse. Unions were a compromise with council communism, which predates Marx by the way. It goes back to the tribe.
The author also fails to directly associate the banksters with General Motors, et al. He mentions AIG in particular where we know that Goldman Sachs would have been hit hard had AIG not been given a dime of the taxpayers' money. Yes, the author has many correct things to say, but he misses the big picture that the entire system is flat out wrong.
"Savers. ...worked all your life and set aside savings to take care of yourself in your retirement.... ...saved, didn’t over-leverage and invested prudently, now anticipating a decent return on that savings...."
That was never the right way to go. That was the sucker's route. The author is looking at the superficial. The capitalist system is wrong at its heart, core, root. It's darkness. Were they cheated? Yes, but what else can be expected given the evil-hearted system of Nabal the churl?
Look, I don't care about trying to work out the minutia within a fatally flawed system. I'm interested only in the right system of the heart of every human being on the planet and wherever else we go. I'm not working within the system. I'm outside entering only to call people to come out to help set up the right way that is as consistent as we are able to make it with what Jesus described that enhanced the earlier understanding of righteousness.
Okay, I understand that by being presented with this blog and its author I'm afforded the opportunity to express its errors that are its shortsightedness, even though it sees more than the average person – some credit for that. I too am not yet perfected. There does though have to come a time when people will move off this disaster called the United States of America and the coming New World Order and rather move on to the Christian Commons.
So, there are selfish types who want to amass as Nabal in the Bible, who is the type known as the "churl" in Isaiah and about whose type Jesus spoke at length as being the problem rather than the solution. I wrote a post yesterday on that, in fact. Every little saver for self is at best a little Nabal in the ultimate sense relative to what Jesus has in mind for all of us together.
- Technorati Tags: AIG, amass, anarcho-capitalist, anti-Christs, anti-union, Austrian School, banksterism, banksters, Bible, Big Business, big picture, capitalist system, capitalists, cheated, Christian Commons, churl, class war, coercion, competition, corporations, council communism, crony capitalism, decent return, democracy, democratic socialists, depravity, entitlements, first premises, first principle, Founding Fathers, fratricide, General Motors, glorified, Goldman Sachs, Good Samaritan, greed, human nature, humanity, hypocrisy, ideology, invested prudently, invisible hand, Isaiah, jargon, Jesus, laissez-faire capitalism, libertarian capitalists, Ludwig von Mises, market, marketplace, Marx, Nabal, New World Order, over-leverage, political marketplace of ideas, retirement, righteousness, sacrosanct, saved, savers, self-centeredness, selfish types, shortsightedness, Social Security, socialists, starve, statism, suckers, taxpayers, the poor, torture, tribe, ultra-greed, ultra-rich, unfunded entitlements, unions, United States of America, violence, violent vigilante groups








Tom Usher
Standing Comment, all posts and pages:
To all homosexuals and their supporters, condoners, promoters, accepters, confirmers, and the like:
Unless you have something completely new that hasn't already been refuted, don't bother. It won't show up.
Rehashing what has already been refuted is a waste of everyone's time.
I'm not interested in casting pearls before swine, giving the children's bread to the dogs, or rebuking a forever scorner.
Learn or go away: There is zero wisdom in homosexuality. Homosexuality is wrong. Nothing any homosexual or anyone else can say or do will alter it. No one needs the Bible to know it either. It's prima facie. There's no such thing as an unrepentant-homosexual Christian. There never has been and never will be. That's the way of it. If you don't like it, change.
Do site searches on the various topics concerning homosexuality to determine if your "point" has already been handled. Currently, I provide three different search methods. The "WordPress" search is still the most thorough.
The same can be done regarding militarism, capitalism, coercion, and many other main issues and themes.
TREATMENT, RUDENESS, POLITENESS, OFFENSE, TRUTH
Many times over the course of this website's existence, I've had commentators complain about how I've treated them and/or others. Much less frequently has anyone taken exception to those commentator's comments. I assume that's because for one, I appear to be holding my own.
Often, I have raised the fact that Jesus called certain people "serpents." I've often also mentioned how he cleaned the temple with whip in hand, not that he used it on anyone. It certainly doesn't say that he did, and neither was he charged with it in the kangaroo court of the serpents who ended up murdering him by proxy just for, among other wonderful things, speaking out and speaking truth.
If I say that those who are engaged in serpentine behavior are the New Testament "serpents," then why take offense at my saying it rather than standing with Jesus and me about it?
If others don't like it that I treat others or them the way I have in this regard, why don't they take it up with the serpents and/or their own consciences and God?
If I wanted to catch flies, I'd use honey. I don't want flies on this level. Human beings aren't to be on the level of flies. If the truth is bitter as vinegar, then ask yourself why and learn to taste it as sweet but not sickeningly so. Why attack the message and messenger, as the serpents did, and become a serpent by so doing?
The issue is not "name calling" on some bratty, childish level. When Jesus said "serpents," he was not being as a brat. His level was completely adult to adults and children. He dared say that the children understood the clear and plain truth before the adults who, afterall, had been abused and socialized by the serpents. He still calls adults back. Those who hear him and know his voice (truth) turn around and do the other required things together as well.
What is it for a human being to be more serpentine or reptilian than what God initially gave? What was and remains Jesus's point? What is the reptilian brain versus the vastly higher human brain with its cerebral cortex and frontal and temporal lobes and specific areas of altruistic sentiments and abilities? What are those higher areas before they are damaged, before the communication pathways to them and between them are diminished by evil that is always some form of abuse? How are those pathways reestablished or created where they never were in this fleshly life?
The snake lays its eggs. The eggs hatch. The snake parent doesn't nurture or raise the offspring. It's every snake for itself. Human parents and family are not designed to be that way. Humans hand down the learning of nurturing. Many people get better training than do others, and many people have a greater aptitude for learning and predisposition for the higher and highest virtues. Many are less abused. People can change for the better and best though, no matter where the starting point. They only can't if they don't — if they reject it.
Snakes, of course, also come in venomous varieties and in strangling varieties, etc., such that they have been attackers and even devourers of humans for eons, guilty and innocent alike.
Now, Jesus knew that most people could relate to what were, and still are, largely considered "good" parenting skills and "good" "family" relations. He regularly used those concepts to get people to consider the wider implications for the whole of humanity. He did know that many would refuse. He let them go. He didn't demand secular or false-religion legislation to rein them in with threats of violence and imprisonment. He was not and is not coercive. Even his Church is a voluntary place to be.
What he still teaches (through the written words in the New Testament and as those connect with the Old and also teaches through the Holy Spirit he definitely sent as he said he would) is, among many other things, that "good" is vastly better than has been commonly accepted and that real "family" is everyone left after all the rest have rejected the higher and highest good. He raised the standards far above the Old Testament and far above the "modern" standard.
The American Empire and the American people in general aren't even touching the hem of his garment, let alone even attempting to stand upright and side-by-side with him.
I point out that Jesus was, and is, a Real Liberal Christian. He is the one who brought back this censored truth that is the light. After he had spoken it and lived it and was murdered for doing so, the censors set about to re-censor it and did. They couldn't put it out though — couldn't completely extinguish the truth. I wouldn't be saying it now again with all credit to God, just as Jesus, if they had been able to completely block it.
I point out that each of those terms ("real," "liberal," and "Christian," along with "Church") are actually redundant terms — synonyms that are so close that they become one. The term "liberal" here is not the common usage, which common usage is a deliberate corruption of the term. There is no harm in real liberalism. There is no vileness in it. There is only beneficence. "Real" may be understood as the opposite of false-hearted, dark side, and dead of the Holy Spirit. Christian is both real and liberal in those senses. To arrive at living, doing, being those full senses requires what Jesus lives, does, and is in the highest. Finally, the Church is the whole.
Who are they who want to drag it down, censor it, work against it, lessen it, ignore it, etc.? Well, who sides with Jesus and who sides against him? Did the serpents side with him then? Do they now?
We call war-mongers "hawks." We call "peacemakers" blessed and "doves." Why do the hawks not take offense at "hawks" but do take offense at "serpents"? "Hawks" is not yet as telling to the general public, but I must tell you that all hawks are serpents. Why do some say, "Greed is good" but take offense at "serpents"? I tell you there is no difference between the selfish and the serpents. Why do people take offense at serpents when they do not take offense at homosexuality? I tell you the homosexual spirit also comes out from the dark side. It is a choice. It is harmful. Many are abused with it. Many never overcome it. Their very brain matter is transformed by it. Then they claim it is good when it remains confusion and definitely wrong and harmful.
Many arguments were put forth in support of tolerance. I understood that Jesus "tolerated," as in he did not execute wrath but rather told the truth and let the blind follow the blind (blind to the truth) into the ditch of their own making. I have watched while the movement has been corrupted into condoning what was once only to be tolerated. I have watched further while it has moved from condoning to promoting even to the youngest children to get to them before the truth does. I have seen evil at work, and I sound the alarm. I face censorship and other negative reactions for it.
As the American Empire claims to be a light to the world, it murders innocent babies by Hellfire missiles fired from predator drones controlled by armchair, video-gaming serpents in uniform. It tortures those who are not even suspects. It spies on its own without even probable cause or reasonable suspicion. It lies its way into wars for spoils and control. It neglects its poor, whom it treads down for the sakes of the superrich — for the sake of the massive flow of mammon from the bottom up (no trickledown — trickledown is a farce and always has been). All is claimed to be okay in America though — that America is headed in the right direction — because soon, even "don't tell, don't ask" will be a thing of the quaint past and homosexuals may be able to sleep together and have sex in the barracks with the "blessing" of the Empire while they practice murdering the innocent for the sake of homosexual, greedy plutocrats who own them and who, in turn, are owned by the dark-side spirit named by God and Jesus as Satan.
Whose side are you on? I speak truth to warn. I don't tell the secular government what to do other than occasionally to say what at least would be less hypocritical within their fallen, unenlightened system. I do so for spiritual reasons. What I want is the Christian Commons.
Now, if you submit a comment:
What you write here against the Real Liberal Christian Church founded by Jesus Christ will mark you in the Biblical sense unless you show that you have turned and are repenting in time to escape the damnation of your own choosing. That's the way of it. Don't be tempted by the devil to stand opposed to the call of righteousness. Overcome such evil temptation. Help others to help yet others to come to righteous behavior through-and-through.
Check out how even after reading this, people will still take it out of context and twist it to an evil end.