Could the Next Big Thing be Christian Socialism
I was surprised to read how many different groups are actively promoting a brand of Christianity that includes socialism. While this is a departure from the last several decades of Christians mistakenly identifying their religion with capitalism, it is something peaking through the cracks in other places. The largest support group for liberal Bernie Sanders is the youngest voters.
When I think about it, however, this is not a surprise. If one tries to see the world through the eyes of a young adult today, it makes sense. College enrollments are falling. Wages are too low to either save money or pay off student debt. The future to some of these young may look bleak.
There must have been millions of young people in previous generations who were optimistic and went to college. Now after graduation today's youth may see their future is over powering debt, health care they cannot afford and housing costs that force living in cramped quarters. If that young person is Christian, it would make sense to pray for a socialist economic system. And, if not religious, vote for one.
This does not seem far afield from the background of Pope Francis. He worked for social justice in South America. Social justice is at least partly about more equal distribution of wages and wealth.
In graduate school I took classes in what we might call the internal mechanisms of socialism. These were not classes advocating socialism but were about the interesting questions of how to allocate land, labor and capital when markets are absent. This was back when the U. S. was trying to understand Russia and its fellow socialist countries. How to create a high standard of living without markets guiding where people work, how land is used and where to make investments is really difficult. It can be done, however.
I would guess young people today see socialism in its most idealistic light and know little about the nuts and bolts of how it works. Idealism is often a good place to start change.
As I said about four topics ago, Christianity can exist, even thrive in virtually all political forms, with the possible exception of something like an Islamic theocracy. Christianity is not a political movement, unless someone subverts it.
ReplyDeleteHelper --"Christianity is not a political movement, unless someone subverts it."
DeleteThat seems very idealistic--good for you for having idealism. I would guess it that were enforced there would be very few left in the faith. Here is another way of thinking, money is mentioned maybe 200 times in the Bible. Who gets more money and who gets less is determined, at least in part, by politics. While I dislike Christianity in politics its there because there are people who want it there.
Not "idealistic", but realistic. It is our firm position. Nothing is enforced, and there are many many "in the faith" , thank you.
DeleteWhen you get to the money, and "who gets more money and who gets less, is a separate and non related matter to our position and practice.
re. "While I dislike Christianity in politics its there because there are people who want it there." is another matter not related, or considered among us. (As you should know by now). Talk to those who want it, not me / us, The broad brush is highly flawed.
I refer you to my first post @ 3;40.; "Christianity can exist, even thrive in virtually all political forms"...To clarify; to co-exist, but not in conjunction with all political forms.
helper: I don't think that Christianity survived very well in Bolshevik Russia.
Deletere. "There would be very few left in the faith". To the contrary, we have Republicans, Democrats, independents, non-political members, and whatever. Everyone is welcome, and they all leave their individual politics at the door, and come together at the alter. Idealistic? Not at all. It is a hallmark of our denomination. If the USA were a socialist, true communistic, or feudal, it would make no difference to us.
DeleteUnknown; re. Bolsheviks . I pretty much agree. You must remember I said "true communistic". The Bolshevik rev. was not true / pure communistic. It was atheistic communism (note the "ism') They pretty well destroyed most of the churches, or confiscated them for government purposes. If memory serves, all the movers and shakers behind the Bolsheviks were clearly anti Christian. To be communistic by itself need not be anything but neutral to Christianity. Property held in common. Think of the Hutterites. A communistic colony, of Anabaptist Christians. There were other small communistic societies in the past, and not necessarily Christian. Mainly eutopian. If memory serves, the Shakers were one of them. The root of communist is commune. Try communal meal. Consider a popular word in Christianity; "Communion." AKA Eucharist. ie. "to be in agreement", " to be in communion" with others in the Sacrament. If one disagrees with what the Sacrament is, one is not in "communion" with the rest of the congregation or denomination. If you prefer beer and chips, or an Oreo and milk, (it has been done) you will probably be refused to attend the table at a traditional service.
DeleteHelper "If memory serves, all the movers and shakers behind the Bolsheviks were clearly anti Christian."
DeleteLike you call me to task for making broad generalizations of Christians, I think we would find the Communism of Eastern Europe to be a mixture of motives and beliefs. There are historians who say Communism is/was not so much against Christianity as it that is saw Christianity as a political rival. To some extent, or at least as some Communist leaders saw it, Christianity was about Capitalism and not equality. Communism was about, in their view, giving everyone a fair shake--against accumulation of wealth by individuals. I don't think it was inaccurate for Communist leaders to consider Christianity as aliened with Capitalism.
As a side note, there is also a sweeping call made that Hitler and by extension Nazism was atheist. I remember reading a book by a WWII German officer. He said when they counter attacked areas previously held by Russians they were asked by peasants if they could hang their cross up. Crosses even in homes had been ordered not displayed by the Russians. German soldiers told folks they could put the crosses back up now that they had been saved by the Fuhrer. So, was Hitler an atheist or a Christian or did he just see religion, like some Russian leaders, in political terms? I'd say it's not perfectly clear.
Jon; Unknown specified BOLSHEVIKS. That's Russia. I did specify "true communistic", with follow up. The biggies in Russia were famously against Christianity. That should be clear to anyone.
DeleteI made no generalizations of Christians. Your reference provides no support for your claim. Could you possibly misplaced communism with Christians? That would make some sense, but even them, I have distanced Russian communism from the "true communistic". Your "taking to task " falls on it's ass.
Your last paragraph is not related to the topic, and is typical of your manner of escaping.
Do you think Marks and Lenin were pro Christian?
I detect a little class envy among the Bolshiviks. I said a LITTLE. I don't know how much, or was it envy? Was it justified? Probably.
re. call to task Christians"; Christianity as a generic term. There are denominations that are not involved in politics period. We are one of them. There are those who are involved in politics. That's on them. I have been clear on that, and your "broad brush" has no bristles, unless you want to accuse us of also being involved, and your broad brush would again be wrong, and your "call to task " is a lying uninformed claim.
Deletehelper: suggested read. Russia Under the Bolshevik Regime by Richard Pipes, 512pp. BTW, the Bolshevik regime killed an estimated 20 million people, with Stalin taking the prize. among other things, he Stalin was responsible for starving 5-6 million Ukrainians. significant elements in the US press turned its back on the whole affair (eg. Duranty (sp?) NYT.
DeleteWhat's your point? There is no point, I clearly separated communistic as a form of government from the Communism you like so well. Your communism was not religious friendly. A purist communist as a form of government without atheistic ideology is neutral, or should be. As is Pure Christianity not involved in politics being neutral. I need not read Pipes, and am aware of all those killed under atheistic communism. And I am aware of the US press, (and some politicos turning their back on the whole affair. I am also aware that most were war weary after WW2 and were reluctant to become more involved with the Soviet Union at that time. Are you aware of the White (German speaking) Russians in central ND and SD that escaped Russia with nothing? They are Catholic, some are Orthodox. They were my mother's neighbors. They have interesting stories. Most of them are dead, by now, but their children continue. There was a communist hall south west of Bismark. Not the atheistic communism you refer to. There may have been some "ism" supporters, but not all, because that was what they escaped from. It was a community social gathering place, but neighbors still held a cautious eye on it. because of what they saw in the news from Russia. Hope that clears this up for you.
Deletesnotty, touchy, touchy. the only reason I suggested it was that I thought that you might have some interest in the Bolshevik regime, what it did and why it did what it did. seems that you already know it all. apologies. I'll try not to make the same mistake again.
DeleteBTW helper Mark is spelled Marx.
DeleteVel, I taut I vas klear in da 1st place. I don' know it all, but I do know enough to get by, but open to learn more. I welcome your contributions. I think you have observed that in the past.
DeleteUnknown; Thanks for the spelling correction. I did know that, but was careless. It probably won't be the last time. Begging forgiveness in advance.
Deleteyou are forgiven. but you might choose your words more carefully, more diplomatically.
ReplyDeleteNaw I carefully chose the words for clarity, and if they are ignored, it's not on me. You appeared to be of a superior attitude with your "snotty; "..seems that you already know it all.". To know it all is never a possibility.
Deleteyou came thru as saying that you disdained my suggestion because you knew it all already. as to knowing it all, Socrates is said to have said that all we can know is that we know nothing. that, of course, is a logical absurdity but as an existential Cri de Coeur it will do. that said, I encourage to go back to your verbal wresting with Jon.
Delete