Nikita Kruschev, a Russian leader in the Communist party back in the 1950's, visited the United States under the Eisenhower administration and spoke with the Secretary of Agriculture at the time, Ezra Benson. Later, Benson recounted the meeting as follows:
"I have personally witnessed the heart-rending results of the loss of freedom. I have talked face to face with the godless communist leaders. It may surprise you to learn that I was host to Mr. Kruschev for a half day when he visited the United States, not that I’m proud of it. I opposed his coming then, and I still feel it was a mistake to welcome this atheistic murderer as a state visitor. But, according to President Eisenhower, Kruschev had expressed a desire to learn something of American Agriculture — and after seeing Russian agriculture I can understand why. As we talked face to face, he indicated that my grandchildren would live under communism. After assuring him that I expected to do all in my power to assure that his and all other grandchildren will live under freedom he arrogantly declaired in substance:
‘You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you’ll fall like overripe fruit into our hands.’"
I've seen and heard quite a few intelligent people speak about what we can "learn from France" or "Canada" or the like...in other words...what we can learn from socialism. Could Kruschev's prophecy be coming true? There's no doubt that we have little doses of socialism already. Is it enough to say we will live under communism shortly, or are there many more doses of socialism still to come before things get so bad that someone steps out and says, 'I will take care of you. I will lead you and this country into a new direction." and everyone follows?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
We will never be ruled under communism. Communism is a failed system of government. Communism only works in a very small community.
I always come back to Jesus and how the Republican party doesn't line it with his policies.
Jesus would not be a captialist, he would be a socialist, no? Health Care for the poor, welfare for the poor.
Luke
22 And when Jesus heard it, he said to him, "One thing you still lack. Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me."
25 For it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Of course you do, you always try to use Jesus and God against Believers. Unfortunately, the verse you chose to quote proves my point.
No, Jesus would not be a socialist. Because He never said that someone else should be in charge of what you do with your money.
In that passage you are quoting...the rich man, is a Tax Collector or Politician. That's the rich man He is speaking to. The King James version uses the term "publican" which is translated to Tax Collector or Politician.
He is not telling the rich man to give Him the money, so He can distribute it how He sees fit. He is not telling the rich man, this Tax Collector to collect more money to give to the poor. He is telling the rich man, this politician, to distribute his own money himself...to give to those less fortunate than himself.
That's what the overwhelming number of rich people in this country do. They give to charities of their choosing, because they know that many charities are much better at distributing money and doing good than is the Government.
This has been shown in many studies. 20/20 even had a special on how Americans as a whole, rich or poor, give more money per capita than any other country in the world...by far. That despite what the likes of Bono suggest. Conservatives give almost double the money to charities than liberals.
Joe Biden gave less than 1% of his income last year to charity, and Barack Obama only gave to charities after he knew he was running for President.
The second verse you quote, Jesus is speaking to the same rich man/Tax Collector/politician who hasn't given any of his money at all to anyone or anything. When He says, "a rich man", He is speaking about a man who has a heart for hording his money and not helping others with it.
Jesus is all about helping others, of course...but it has to come from the individual person's heart. Again, he never instructed Caesar to tax to the hilt and then give to the poor. He instructed rich individuals to spread their blessings to those less fortunate...that it should come from their own free will.
That was what my mind was going to from the start of the comments . . . free will.
I have read the parable, I guess it all comes down to interpretation. Ok, so he doesn't say the government should aid in the distribution of charity (they may have a better idea of who needs it than one individual has, quite an undertaking for one person to know who really needs it) but the way i read it is that the tax collector should distribute his wealth to the poor.
But then I thought, if everyone did that, then everyone would have equal wealth and we would all be rich and none of us would make into heaven ;o)
I think one only needs eyes to be able to tell who really needs help. By and large, the government doesn't have a clue as far as what individuals need help or, again, how to best help them.
Habitat for Humanity, for instance, has helped at least twice as many Katrina victims in half the time.
When Government thinks it can, and should, do it all, that's where the problems lie. That's Socialism, at best. And Socialism run amuck, turns to Communism.
There's no doubt that we already have components of Socialism. Banking has already fallen victim. Auto and Air want to be next. Obama has already promised Energy and Health Care will be socialized.
How many industries will it take before we just throw in the towel and call in Communism? Will it take the Government saying that the New York Times is too big to fail....bail them out, and then they have a full blown propraganda outlet before we call a spade a spade?
That very well could be coming. The Times' bonds are junk status, their stock is in the tank, their subscriber rate sucks. Oh, it could happen.
Now with the auto bailout, it is really getting scary. You are right, how many industries do we bail out?
I am going to watch the IO U.S.A. shortened version over on Dodos' blog. it looks good but scary.
Post a Comment