I stand accused of being an an Idealistic Capitalist, to which I plead guilty.

Continue reading at Forbes Opinions…

This conflict was laid bare for all to see in last night’s State of The Union address from President Barack Obama, and the GOP Response delivered by Obama’s ideological archnemesis, Congressman Paul Ryan.

Continue reading at Forbes Opinions…

I am pleased to announce that I will be writing a column every other week at Forbes online called “On Civil Society”.

The first article is out there already, discussing the thought-provoking subject of “social business” as a possible alternative to “capitalism” in helping the world’s chronically poor.      Why the quotes around “capitalism”?  You’ll have to read the article…

Check out “How the Free Market Tames Greedy Investors” at Forbes online.

The Lord said to Joshua, ‘See, I have handed Jericho over to you, along with its king and soldiers. ³You shall march around the city, all the warriors circling the city once. Thus you shall do for six days, ⁴with seven priests bearing seven trumpets of rams’ horns before the ark. On the seventh day you shall march around the city seven times, the priests blowing the trumpets. ⁵When they make a long blast with the ram’s horn, as soon as you hear the sound of the trumpet, then all the people shall shout with a great shout; and the wall of the city will fall down flat, and all the people shall charge straight ahead.’

- Joshua 6:2-5, NRSV

Here’s a story that simply needs to be retold, a modern day story of Jericho, and I believe a foreshadowing of this coming November 2nd.

As a subscriber to the Cato Institute’s monthly “Cato Audio” program, I recently listened to David Boaz, Cato’s Executive Vice President, recount a gripping sequence of events that ultimately led to the collapse of the Berlin Wall.  When an entire generation of younger voters, including perhaps many who enthusiastically supported the election of Barack Obama, has little or no recollection of the Soviet Union and its attending Communism, it is a story worth knowing, and spreading. Andrew Curry has excellent account here, but a much less-detailed summary from several sources follows:

Leipzig Nikolaikirche - St. Nicholas Church

Founded around 1165 and home of Johann Sebastian Bach from 1723-1750, the Leipzig Nikolaikirche (St. Nicholas Church) in East Germany became the site of regular “prayers for peace” meetings every Monday night, starting in 1982, led by “two young pastors”, Christian Führer and Christoph Wonneberger.

The American deployment of nuclear Pershing II missiles on American military bases in West Germany in 1983 was matched by Soviet deployment of SS-13 nuclear missiles in East Germany.   The nuclear missiles brought protests from Germans on both sides.  A pastor named Rainer Eppelmann wrote his “Berlin Appeal”, a call for disarmament, and that brought heightened scrutiny of anyone involved in the peace movement.   St. Nicholas Church became somewhat of a refuge, having according to Führer, “a monopoly on freedom, physically and spiritually.”

Although the secret State Security Police of GDR (or “Stasi”) sometimes made arrests or “temporary detentions” of attendees, some the Stasi attended the meetings themselves and were thus exposed to the very prayers and word of God that were banned in so many parts of the Soviet empire.

Risks notwithstanding, word spread of the meetings and attendance grew.

1985 brought Mikhail Gorbachev to the head of the Soviet state and began his programs of reforms through the Soviet bloc.  A key event occurred in late Spring, 1989.  According to Curry:

The last straw came on May 7, 1989, when regular elections for local party officials across East Germany were exposed as fraudulent by a loose network of volunteers who observed the vote count at local “precincts”, a right enshrined in the East German constitution but never before exercised in an organized way, and then gathered in churches to compare results. The discrepancies were reported in samizdat pamphlets and passed to Western reporters.  “We could prove the people who were ruling our country were criminal,” Eppelmann says now, his voice still rising with outrage and amazement.  “They weren’t satisfied with 70 or 80 percent [of the vote]. They needed almost 100. It was sick – sick, and criminal.”

Within a month of that, the tragic attacks on the Chinese pro-democracy protesters in Beijing’s Tienanmen Square were witnessed by the world, and East Germans, remembering their own history, grew fearful that they could ultimately see a similar fate.   Yet simultaneously, it became apparent that Moscow’s era of tight control over East Germany was coming to an end, and with that, East Germans began to flee via Hungary into Austria, and ultimately to West Germany, thus getting around the Berlin Wall.

Embarrassing to the East Berlin government, and socially dislocating to thousands who might suddenly miss a family member or service provider, the people were increasingly forced to make a choice:  do we abandon a sinking ship, or stay and save what we have?    Overwhelmingly people chose the latter, and with that, relations between the people and their leaders deteriorated rapidly.   Again from Curry’s account, “In the first week of October, nearly 3,500 East Germans were arrested as the police tried to jail anyone they thought capable of organizing protests.”

By Monday night, October 9th, with Führer and Wonneberger having been briefly arrested, it was feared that a Chinese-style solution was a distinct possibility.   The Stasi had made preparations to handle about 20,000 protesters.   Instead, nearly 70,000 people, fully one sixth of Leipzig, participated in a march on the road ringing the city, holding candles and chanting “Keine Gewalt” (no violence) and “Wir sind das Volk” (we are the people).   And the Stasi backed down — it was the turning point in the entire sequence of events:

“We all carried lighted candles,” said Birgit Scheffle. The candles had a pacifying impact on the soldiers, she said.

“When you walk with a lighted candle you must use both hands. One hand holds the candle, the other keeps the flame from going out. So, you cannot throw a stone at soldiers, and soldiers can see that you cannot throw a stone.

“That day marked the beginning of the end of East Germany.”

– Germany, Leipzig’s Revolution of Candles and Prayers

Reagan's request fulfilled

Participation in the Monday night prayer demonstrations and marches roughly doubled in size in each of the next three weeks, with people coming from all over East Germany, until November 4th, when more than 500,000 marched.   Five days later, on November 9th, “confused, overwhelmed guards stood back and let people through” the Berlin Wall, with the iconic sledgehammer scenes coming shortly thereafter.     One of the most visible wounds of Communism would begin to heal.

*  *  *

Boaz’s speech was made at a Cato “Policy Day” in May.   Had it instead been after Glenn Beck’s recent August 28th “Restoring Honor” event at the Lincoln Memorial, an event having more in common with a multi-hour sermon than a political demonstration, it’s hard to imagine that he would not have noted the symbolic, if not literal, parallels.

Glenn Beck's Restoring Honor Event, August 28, 2010

Like in Leipzig on October 9th, the crowd size wound up being dramatically bigger than nearly anyone projected, and certainly every liberal media producer wrestled with just how to describe the crowd for the record.  Over 130,000 people (including this author) watched the event via Facebook. And yet the event was entirely peaceful, (Beck’s bullet-proof vest thankfully being proven unnecessary) with potential instigators and trouble-makers being policed by the attendees and organizers themselves.

And like in East Germany, the people have decided to decisively take a stand, this time against the turn of legislative events of the last eighteen months.   For as Obama’s agenda is building walls in front of our economy’s ability to heal itself, an outpouring of formerly politically inactive people are uniting around a message of “Enough!” and are ready to tear them down, via prayer and the voting both.  Indeed, the message isn’t only intended for Democrats, with both liberal donkeys and old-school “establishment” elephants suddenly contemplating the number of required moving boxes.   Just ask Mike Castle.

But also as in East Germany, the entrenched forces of power are readying for the fight, even exploring using the power of the state to prevent people from taking defensive measures against a valuation collapse of their fiat currency.  Last but not least, the quiet threats (or promises, depending on the audience) of last-hurrah “lame duck session” legislation loom large.

Just as the East Germans saw the distinct possibility of a Tienanmen-Square style crackdown, it’s quite clear that a groundswell of previously disengaged voters is rising up to avoid a Greece-style collapse of a U.S. government spinning out of control.    As Joshua led his forces for seven trips around Jericho, and as East Germans reached a crescendo over a seven week period 21 years ago, the next seven weeks in the U.S. might well have an equally dramatic conclusion.

Free Subscription ~ Follow on Twitter ~ Read More on Liberty

Last week I also finished reading a remarkable new book by Jay Richards entitled “Money, Greed and God”, which I discovered via the Cato Institute’s  ”Cato Audio” series.  As we continue to debate the causes of the recent financial crisis and what to do about it, Richards’ book arrives on the scene just in time.  Suffice it to say, Richards thoroughly substantiates the message of his subtitle “Why Capitalism Is The Solution And Not The Problem.”   But the applicability of “Money, Greed and God” goes far behind the recent events of the financial crisis.   What makes it stand out is that Richards addresses many of today’s hottest public policy issues from a theological perspective, skillfully navigating the terrain where few dare to tread, that is, mixing politics with religion.  Why is this so important?  I can offer my views as a Christian, although I believe they apply fairly universally to the major religions of the world.

The Bible offers no explicit blueprint for how to set up a government.  Indeed, governments are entirely man-made creations.  Yet there are at least two other areas that Bible talks a lot about: love and sin.  We are charged to do well by our fellow man, to care, to love.  Yet at the same time, we are sinners, so we are bound to make mistakes even as we try to care and to love.   It would follow, therefore, that our man-made institutions are bound to make mistakes.    If we truly care about helping our fellow man, to the extent that we attempt to implement more and more of our “care giving” and compassion through our government, do we have the responsibility as followers of God to monitor the progress?  Do we also have the responsibility to change course if our original goals are not being met?

We can read in Genesis that man was created by God, in His own image.  Richards expands on that in a way that struck me as particularly novel.  If God is the Creator with a capital ‘C’, then being created in His image, mankind has been endowed with the ability to create as well — we are creators with a little ‘c’.   And mankind’s progress through history, with all of our worldly creations, should demonstrate that.     But what have we “created” via our government, in the name of compassion?   Is it working?

At the end of the day, most of the programs and policies of government initiated in the name of helping people amount to rounding up resources from the private sector and redistributing them to others.   And there are plenty of people who argue we need to do more of that.  But if these programs and policies are in fact not working, or perhaps even making things worse, and yet we continue to do them, I would suggest that we are ignoring the original goal of helping others and instead focusing on how these programs make us feel instead.

My guess is that it is a very rare sermon that gets into these areas.   That is a shame, because it flies in the face of what believers in God are taught.   As Saint James wrote (James 2:14-26 NRSV), “faith without works is dead.”  But is faith though repeatedly failing works alive?

In a truly Faustian bargain, churches retain their tax-free status by staying out of politics.   What has the cost of that been?   Consider the fact that over 40% of the population does not pay income tax, and thus has no incentive to monitor the cost of government.  Would it be so bad some of these people were exposed to the cost of government via the Sunday collection plate?   Or to hear evidence of how some particular law is thwarting social justice?  I’m not sure one has to follow this all the way through to particular churches endorsing particular candidates.   But with liberty’s proven track record of helping the human condition, I would think that the Church would want to be its most visibly vocal proponent, and clearly it is not.   As Frederic Bastiat so eloquently wrote in The Law, “liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works.”

Many people say that discussions of government, politics and economics have no place in and amongst religion.  But consider this:   It is within the collective of man-made public policy that people of faith must attempt to implement their ideas and beliefs. Some systems provide more fertile ground for implementation than others.   And in fact, the policies and programs of government might very well be working at cross-purposes to the social goals frequently promoted by various churches and religions.   In short, people of faith have every reason in the world to be concerned and involved with the workings of government.

To whatever extent we ignore the efficacy of the government-led “solutions” to our society’s ills, all done with the best intentions in the name of compassion, I would suggest that we are engaging in a false compassion.   Getting back to Haiti and Chile, it is very clear what economic framework saved lives, and what framework did not.   I wouldn’t dare suggest that traditional missionary work is not vitally important.  But when the earthquake struck, Haiti suffered as much from a lack of better construction materials and techniques, that is, better capital, as they did from the lack any particular religious teaching.   As Christians and other people of faith seek Truth with a capital ‘T’, so we should seek truth with a lowercase ‘t’ when implementing our “solutions”.

Examples of “false compassion” are legion and some obvious ones will make the point:   Where is the compassion in minimum wage laws that produce outrageous teenage unemployment? Where is the compassion in high tax rates that are a proven disincentive to job creation?   Where is the compassion in government run health care that is bankrupting our country?   It is high time that our religious leaders take a hard look at the man-made systems through which they are attempting to spread and implement God’s word.  We can not change God’s plans for our world, but we can organize our societies in ways that give His instructions the best chance of success.

Sign up for a Free Subscription

Jude Wanniski

As one of the earliest and most passionate promoters of what would be called “supply-side economics”, Jude would speak to anyone who would listen.  Indeed, in the lead up to the Iraq war, where he was beating the drums about former weapons inspector Scott Ritter’s reports that we would not find any weapons of mass destruction, his unorthodox views cost him friendships.    Jude was ignored, and the Bush presidency became tarred with the events of the Iraq War.  This  served to greatly knock Bush’s focus off of what should have been the nail in the coffin for big government.   It set the stage for a wordsmith like Obama to sweep into power, promising utopia on earth, created by government.   It seemed like the limited-government movement would be back by a generation or more.   Or so we thought…

The first chapter of Wanniski’s 1978 masterwork, “The Way The World Works”, describes Wanniski’s “Political Model” and opens with this summary:

“The political model holds that the electorate is wiser than any of its component parts.

Civilization progresses in a political dimension through the ability of politicians to read the desires of the electorate.  Neither the press corps nor other “opinion leaders” influence the electorate, except in the sense of broadcasting the political menu.  Their influence instead bears on the politicians, who look to opinion leaders for help in ascertaining the wishes of the electorate.  The decline of a nation state or political unit is a sign of repeated failure of the political class to read the wishes of the electorate.  Emigration is a sure sign of relative political failure.  At the extreme, the electorate resorts to revolution, thereby adjusting the political framework and raising to power a new political class better able to read the desires of the electorate.  Modern nation states have built into their political frameworks various safety values that can bring about urgent corrections in the avoidance of violent revolution or war.”

Barack Obama, as he continues to provoke and escalate what could virtually be called a cold Civil War, ignores Wanniski’s sage observations to his steady demise.  Rather than stepping back and acknowledging that Scott Brown’s recent win in Massachusetts’ special election for the late Ted Kennedy’s senate seat is but the latest attempt of the voters to say “No!” to his overreaching agenda, he instead doubles down and promises an even stronger fight.

When Wanniski talks of emigration, it is easy to think of places like Mexico, from which thousands of citizens try to flee each month.   But it should be just as easy to think of California, or New York, or Michigan, all laboratories of big government and all reaping the failures of the policies they have sown.   To now have the voters of Massachusetts emigrate en masse from their tradition of sending a Democrat to the Senate, a seat held by over fifty years by a Kennedy, is nothing short of cataclysmic from a Democratic pollster’s vantage point.   The volume of this message to Obama should cause more hearing damage than Spinal Tap’s amps cranked up to eleven.

As for Wanniski’s talk of revolution, one only needs to look to the followers of Ron Paul and the morphing of that into the Tea Party movement.   Now referred to as “astro-turf” at the peril of the accuser’s reputation, after shocking swings of the voting pendulum in Virginia, New Jersey, Westchester County New York and now Massachusetts, it should be clear that this is one Party that is going to give a wicked hangover to resolute defenders of Big Government.

Come November, we’ll learn whether or not Congress has swung far enough to override a Presidential veto on a Wanniski-style supply-side tax cut.   Simply allowing the Bush supply-side tax cuts to become permanent, rather than expire at year’s end, would substitute nicely.    In the meantime, Obama would do well to head Wanniski’s even larger message:   that no matter how smart of an administrative team he tries to assemble and maintain, it is no match for the collective wisdom of the electorate.    If he realized the latter, he would drop his populist class-warfare and instead pursue an agenda of individual empowerment, rooted in personal liberty.   Doing so might be his only hope for winning a second term, possibly against Scott Brown.