I've been posting a lot of political blogs recently, and the main reason is that at lunchtime at my new job I scan through all the news websites (and MSN for its quirky stories) and then spend the rest of the day thinking about the news. I cannot promise that future posts will be either funny or political. However, I want to wrap my thoughts together.
My political views, shaped by my dad by the time I was eight and furthered through logic as I grew, tend to be of a minimalist government and capitalist society. I love history and acknowledge the advances we have made. There were gross abuses of the capitalist system, however, I cannot see that government regulation has made much of a positive impact since the middle of the 20th century. Once workers were being treated fairly and safely and laws were in place to protect consumers, capitalism pretty much had everything it needed.
I recently discussed my views with a friend over lunch. I mentioned abuses to capitalist systems - such as fraud, intent to deceive buyers, and so on. She made an excellent point - even these abuses, under a truly capitalist society, get discovered and rectified. Think about Enron. The people who committed fraud at Enron today are not rich, many are in jail, and the company is gone. The unfortunate side effect is that the hundreds of innocent people involved in that scandal also saw financial ruin.
In a way, this is a fairly black and white view.
That brings me to my other point. I believe in pure capitalism, but I also believe in charity. Sometimes people, whether due to situations in their control or not, cannot rise to the advantages of a capitalist society. When that happens, those of us who can should aid them. America is great because no one need go without a home or food because there is always a homeless shelter or food kitchen to provide for needs. (Of course, we still have homeless for many reasons, but most efforts to help these people off the streets end in failure, as this lifestyle is of their choosing). There are programs for education and self betterment as well, and still plenty left over to help other countries.
Even in charity, capitalism is a helpful tool. It is better to teach a man to fish, they say. And ultimately, we all want to have jobs and to feel usefully employed. Think about the early Christians - they shared everything, and no one was rich or poor (which is essentially communism), but they also made a point that everyone work to their ability.
Capitalism is a good system for a good economy, but charity is a good system for a good society. Unfortunately, when charity gets written into the economy through government intervention, the opposite of what is intended can happen. I have heard that some people believe their taxes are too low. In their human sympathy, they feel guilt about their well-off position and wish to spread the wealth. However, because they have come to rely on the government to spread the wealth, they don't even think to actually spend their own take-home pay on charitable works. Others spend the money but do not get involved. Every election year, the media reports charitable giving by candidates. It always seems the candiate who is most anxious to institute government social programs is the one who spends the lowest percentage of his income on charity.
I could go on and on in different directions that I may take in future blogs. However, I want to give an example of why it is so important that changes in society be brought about by love and not government intervention. Because I am a woman, I feel the following is an appropriate example.
The historical picture for women has been mostly negative. For thousands of years, culture and laws did not allow us to vote, hold well paying or respecatble jobs, or escape from abusive marriages. However, thorughout history there have been shining stars of women who achieved great things. Many times, I look upon these women only to discover that there was a man who believed in them. A father or husband taught her his trade, encouraged her to get an education, or so on. This does not mean that women could not succeed on their own (many did) but only is an example of how the love and care of a man was often pivotal for success.
So it was with gaining the right to vote. How do you "gain" the right to vote? You can't vote yourself the right. Someone else has to vote it for you. The first state to allow women to vote had to do so on the urging of men. The first woman elected to congress was voted for by men and women. But how do you get men to allow women to vote? Because the men who know women and love women see that they need to have a voice. Because men realize that the system as it stands is unfair to women and unethical on a human rights level.
Essentially, love only, not government mandates, allowed women to reach equal voting ground with men.
Throughout the first half of the century, women gained grounds professionally and educationally. Once again, male institutions had to open up their doors to women out of love and compassion. Women took over in the workforce during the wars and men, gratefully, worked together with them when they came back. Men loved women. Women loved men. Real change happened.
However, in the 1960's and 1970's, the attitude changed. Women started to resent men for various reasons, forgetting that it was men who put them in their position of voting and working. They started demanding more and more "rights," and trying to gain equality. These women are still trying to gain equality, because to them, nothing will ever be enough. They stopped celebrating the beauty of being female and the love and companionship of men, and they started celebrating themselves and their own perceived achievements.
Rules enacted during this time did not serve to help the environment of men and women. It started to become common for companies to feel obligated to hire and promote women, which led to resentment among male employees. Women were given scholarships to colleges that men could not apply to. Women forced their way into all-male organizations. Any given remark was subject to be called sexist. And so on.
Men stopped feeling the need to love women into a position of respect because women were pushing their way in - sometimes causing resentment. So, compare the changes in the first half of the century to the second half. In the first half, women gained the right to vote and to work to support themselves. These concepts have become so embedded in our culture because they work. They are based on love. In the second half, women complained about nearly everything, elbowed their way in to what they could, and complained some more. If anything, although women have the same rights as men, it is possible that they have eroded some of the respect men used to have for them.
This is what I mean when I say that change has to be brought about by love. Once we won the right to vote and work, it was only a matter of time before other equalities fell into place. Hard working women would eventually be rewarded by their bosses with promotions and raises. This may have taken time, just as the voting process took over 100 years, but it would have happened. And then we would live in a world where we are truly equal. Instead, both sexes seem to be constantly looking over their shoulders, always suspecting the other of trying to keep them down. It truly became a battle of the sexes.
This same pattern continues in any venue in which one group of people or the government try to force something upon someone else. To put it another way, all Christians are taught the virtue of charity, but very few give up everything they have for the sake of others. Through our own growth in Christ and love for others we can also help change the world and make it a better place, but any kind of forced response diminishes the physical and spiritual returns of the good it attempted to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment