Christian Reconstructionism is a type of dominion theology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_Theology, which is rooted in the reformed faith of Calvinism in particular. (note This is not to say that all calvinists are like them. Christian Recon is an extreme example of politicised religion.) Dominionists seek to replace our representitive democracy with a theonomy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theonomy. Officially they propose to do this peaceably, by getting people to vote for candidates that support there agenda. They have already come to dominate the Republican party, down in Texas. http://www.theocracywatch.org/texas_gop.htm (note 2. Once again, not all Republicans are dominionists. Not even all of the "religious Right". And there is a difference between dominionism and traditionalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditionalist_conservatism even.) All freedom loving americans, including christians and/or conservatives, need to stand against this reactionary religious extremism. On a personal note, my maternal cousin, Adam, is christian recon. So I have to deal with these attitudes first hand. In fact, I think that by and large my entire family tends to support political Christianity. So I would appreciate it if you'd keep in your prayers and/or thoughts, as I stand up against this threat to our personal freedom, and human rights. It's just so shocking that there are actually christians who are similar in many ways to the islamists. P.S. Here is a link to my radical right cousin's blog http://puritancalvinist.blogspot.com/, and also here is an article that informatively illustrates what Rushdoony's ideology is all about, and why it's so alarmingly extreme. http://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/fundienazis/royal_race.htm
7 comments:
libertarian socialist is an oxymoron. Libertarianism is strictly against the initiation of force as a means of achieving goals while socialism cannot survive without it.
First off, you do not know about the history of the word "libertarian". The word was first used as an euthemism, by anarchists. http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/150-years-of-libertarian Joseph Déjacque was the first person to describe himself as a "libertarian". He was an anarchist too. The reason why classical liberals, as well as so called anarcho-capitalists, appropiated the word to describe themselves was that the word "liberal" had become used to refer to the "modern liberalism" of such men as Franklin D. Roosevelt. So old style liberals are now known as libertarians, and so we left-libertarians refer to ourselves as "libertarian socialists", in order to differentuate ourselves from them. Now as to whether or not socialism can survive without a state. I would argue that corporate capitalism can not sustain itself, apart from the state. For example, just look at the current credit/financial crisis, and how the government felt it necessary to bail out private industries. This was why Karl Marx refered to liberal democracy as being the "dictatorship of the bourgeois", because it serves the interests of the bourgeois class. But libertarian socialism however does not require government assistance. Instead it relies upon such things as worker's co-operatives, credit unions, and mutual aid. So it's not like the socialism of the U.S.S.R., or even democratic socialism. No, I personally do believe in having a market economy. Now not all anarchists/libertarians do, mind you. I have an on-line friend, whom is also a libertarian socialist. But she is an anarcho-communist, and so she advocates a gift economy, in which all goods and services cost nothing. As you can see, there are differing points of view regarding the exact nature of how an alternative economic system should be like. But the one thing all libertarian socialists have in common is our rejection of government ownership of the means of production/distribution. Instead we all support participatory economics, under worker's self management. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_self-management Finally if you continue to read my blogposts, as well as read past posts, you'll get a better idea of what contemporary left-libertarianism is all about. Or at least my concept of it.
I have a Christian libertarian blog, which comes from a libertarian mutualist perspective. I would agree that reconstructionism is ultra authoritarian and theocratic. For the person that says socialism is incompatible with libertarianism, he is simply misinformed. The person is thinking of state socialism such as in the former USSR and China. Libertarian socialism is a voluntary socialism that is organic not state created. For the mutualist it is also free market. The Libertarian party USA has attempted to hijack the term libertarian to refer only to capitalists. When you start to compare libertarian socialism with libertarian capitalism it become obvious that LS is superior in upholding the libertarian principles of voluntary/non coercive societies that respect liberty then are capitalist versions of libertarianism. Capitalism invariably leads to wealth amassing within the hands of a a few leaving the masses at the will of the elites with no true voice or control over their destiny. LS gives ownership and control within the economic sphere to everyone within a business interprise. I believe mutualism to be the best expression of LS, but thats another issue.
Thank you for your encouraging comment. I appreciate it. I will also check out your blog as well. I myself like to think of my self as a mutualist, and I feel that it would be the best suited for American social conditions, and culture. However I personaly choose to label myself an "anarchist without adjective", as I do not wish to possibly alienate potential supporters over any differing socio-economic views. Also, as one who used to be a marxist, when I was a teenager, I also tend to use autonomist rhetoric, in making my points. But I have no personal animosity towards christians in general. And As Rosa Luxemburg wrote in her essay, "Socialism and the Churches", I do not feel that christianity necessarily is opposed to marxism,and/or socialism, either.
I'm working on a book about my socio political economic theory that I'm calling "cooperativism". I am trying to formulate a libertarian socialist vision for our present 21st century world and nation that is more flexible, positive, and inclusive. I am not locked into any particular school either, thought mutualism is the one I'm closest to. I really want to take the values of Libertarian Socialism of direct participatory democracy, decentralized government, greater egalitarianism, non coercive/voluntary society and promote that within my system. Cooperativism is more value centered then ideological in nature. Anarchists and libertarians will speak of potential political communities and debate whether its really a "state" or voluntary community. They do the same with economics. I'm not really concerned with what you call it, the more important questions does the political-social-economic community embody the above values from which we hold dear. If not how can we transform it to embrace such values. Even if they do hold such values how can we improve upon it? I really do think the above values are in line with my Christian faith as well as other religious/spiritual traditions. Take the above values and what can you ultimately reduce them down to within a community? The golden rule: Do on to others as you would have done to you, and the rule of love your neighbor as yourself. Love is gentle not coercive which some Christians never stop to think about in the political context. Sure, I'm not in favor of drugs, I think their a bad thing. But as a Christian I should use love to persuade my neighbor away from them, not the force of government. I think Marx and some Anarchists missed the boat when they came out against religion because they could have built some strong allies with them. hey drop me an email at Spillers36@hotmail.com i use my hotmail account more then my gmail one
Its amazing how many different schools there are within the whole libertarian socialist umbra. I've read and heard of so many. The differences usually are not all that significant and focus more on tactic and emphasis of the group. With cooperativism I'm trying to keep it basic and broad based. I was a political science major as an undergrad and learned very little about anarchism. In fact, I had one class in history on it in college and the professor got most of her information totally wrong and didn't address any key figures or schools of thought. She basically made anarchists sound like really stupid Marxists. The only thinker that has any name recognition today in popular culture is Noam Chomsky and he really doesn't have that much. He isn't totally consistent either, but at least its good to have some voice. I'm hoping to educate people on the values of LS.
Christian Reconstructionism is naive, it thinks that the teachings of the Bible can be safely incorporated with the worldly political structure and that the worldly political structure will not pervert its message. Yahshua/Jesus said that his kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36), the kingdom of God is within you (Luke 17:21). Christian Reconstructionists go about it the wrong way, they want to use the State with all it's immorality, coercion, and violence and let it corrupt the message of the Bible. What followers of Yahshua/Jesus should really do is keep separate from the State with its immorality, coercion, and violence, not conform to the pattern of the world (Romans 12:2), and stand up for what is right, when doing what is right is illegal, obey God rather than man (Acts 5:29).
Post a Comment