home polity my creed contact info books links sitemap
related articles
print email save save as pdf
 

Lien of OZ
Abortion
Artificial Reproduction
Bible Study
Family issues
Fatherhood
Homosexuality
Islam
One World Government
Church Order
Deacons
Elders
Men 
Sunday School
Women
Worship
Scripture
Bible
Theology
Creation
  Eschatology
Evangelise
Fear
Free Will
God
Heresies
Law
Love
Predestination
Reformed
Sacraments
Scripture
Sin
Soteriology
Sovereignty
Truth
Creeds
Ancient
Reformed
Universalistic
Verses
Words
Festivals
December 25
Easter
Halloween
Personal
Sabbath
Government
Church & State
Democracy
Government
Living
Body Mods
Death
Commitment
Discipline
Fear
Family
Kingdom
Modesty
Ourtimes
Prayer
Righteous
Potpourri
Abortion
Dates
Democracy
Historical
Homosex
Letters
Passages
Quotes
Sermons
Tracts
Religions
Evolution
Islam
Israel
Pagan
Copyright
Emails
Home

LEFTISM

aymon de albatrus


"But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he has denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." (1Ti 5:8)

“The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (Gen 6:5)


The concept of LEFT dates from the 1790s, when in the French revolutionary parliament, the socialist representatives, sat to the presiding officer's left. Leftists tend to be hostile to the interests of traditional elites, including the wealthy and members of the aristocracy, and to favour the interests of the working class (proletariat). Indeed, the French revolution was a Leftists revolution. In politics, the portion of the political spectrum associated in general with egalitarianism and popular or state control of the major institutions of political and economic life. They tend to regard social welfare as the most important goal of government. Socialism is the standard leftist ideology in most countries of the world; communism is a more radical form of leftist ideology

In the past, Leftism used to be seen as a theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labour for the common advantage of all members. In recent times, with the dismal failure of Communism, Leftism has moved on to cover all sort of humanistic endeavours. During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism and even communism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. However, the general cover of Leftism consists mainly of socialists, collectivists, and ''politically correct'' types such as: feminists, homos and disability activists, animal-rights activists, greens and the like fringe thoughts.

The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism are driven by feelings of inferiority and over socialization. Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while over socialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential. This group, 'Political correctness', has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual white males from middle to upper middle-class families.

Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (Aboriginals of all nations), repellent (homosexuals) or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior, but they would never admit to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems.

Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong and as capable as a man. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.

Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, and they hate rationality and everything that is decent and flourishing.

Leftists are inclined to be aggressive activists, promoting their utopian convictions publicly with evangelical zeal with all sorts of street marches. Through their fervour, in the heat of the moment, they often unveil the ugly side of their character by inadvertently blurting out their eager anticipation of the time when they will administer, with relish, the coercive measures upon their perceived enemies. For the Leftist politician the desire is to enact legislation for grandiose collectivistic and economically levelling undertakings. For the Leftist academician and intellectual the desire is, to put it simply, to force everyone to think and act in a manner that would conform with a model of human behaviour in an ideal egalitarian society conceptualized by Leftist philosophy. For the blue-collar Leftist street fighter the underlying motivation can be as simple as hatred for the ‘boss’.

The nature of the Leftists’ character inescapably shapes their ideology. There is an unpleasant truth about Leftism that its followers will of course hotly deny. The fundamental, subliminal allure of Leftism is not its call to altruistic service to improve the lot of man, but rather it is the promise of power to those who participate in implementing the necessary coercive measures. Expressed in its crudest form, the Leftist ideology attempts to justify looting of wealth and labour, and the complete regimentation of society. It advocates, first of all, that it is quite all right that those who have not to take by force from those who have, and secondly, that nobody has an inviolable right to permanent ownership of anything. That premise serves to justify taxation as well as confiscation and that grand old euphemism - nationalization.

These concepts are clearly seen in their many street marches, unmistakably.  One day on a wall in the port there was written together with the communist symbol: "we want more pay for less working hours", surely this reflects perfectly the leftist ethos.

Politically, the fundamental essence of leftism is not merely its snarling antipathy to "big business" or corporations or the idea of a global market economy in general, or even its abiding contempt for and resentment against "bourgeois values " (thrift, honesty, work ethic, punctuality, a desire to make a better life for oneself and ones family, etc.). The essence of political leftism is in its opposition to the concept and institution of private ownership of property. To the extent that someone disrespects private property rights – either personally or through the political policies he advocates – to that extent he is a left-winger. Likewise, to the extent that a person consistently upholds and respects the private property rights of others, to that extent he is a "right winger".  To be noted, that these days, many Leftists have their own private property, typically inconsistent with their creed. 

A story that illustrated this point well: a Leftist was preaching to his friend: "I believe that who has a house should share it!" "yeah Yeah" supported the friend; "I believe that who has a motorbike, should share it"  "Yeah Yeah" echoed the friend; "I believe that who has a bike ... ", his friend stopped him saying: "halt! stop there, the bike I got".  

Leftists also claim they are for freedom – but it is not the freedom from coercive interference with peaceful adults for which libertarians stand. No. The leftists clamour for freedom from want, freedom from deprivation, freedom from poverty, freedom from being disadvantaged, freedom from discrimination, freedom from having one’s feelings hurt, freedom from the real world, and other such false "freedoms" which, if they can be achieved at all, come only at the forced expense of productive peaceful adult law abiding citizens. They think people have a "right" to "free" medical care, food, schooling, retirement funding, disability assistance, housing subsidies, etc. – all to be supplied by the government who will "milk" industrious successful people to pay for it; in other words, they believe that some people have a "right" to violate the rights of others.

There is definitely more than one link between Leftists and Homosexuals. Have you ever wondered as to why in Leftists marches homosexuals and Lesbians feature so prominently amongst them, never in the Rightists' side? Someone said: "Most people don’t know it, but most "pure," anarchist libertarians are homosexuals, specifically, the leftist libertarians. They also tend to be anarchists, or, as they put it, anarcho-capitalists".

These Leftists shout for an "equality" that will never exist. In any society people will arrange themselves into loose hierarchies, with many different tribes, with the leaders at the top and the lazy and stupid at the bottom. This places homosexuals in a quandary. Their tribe has never been accepted as the equal of heterosexuals, and never will be, for they are not. That’s why there is such uproar over gay marriage. The most homosexuals can expect is tolerance, and little else. The fact they’re never been totally accepted is why so many of them (the leftist ones) want to use the power of government to pass laws granting them what they see as equal rights, for they could not care less about the holy institution of Marriage.

The Leftists are traditionally anti-religious and most never have usually wanted anything to do with any religious figure such as Jesus. Jesus did after all say: "For ye have the poor always with you" (Mat 26:11) and he did make a point of dining with rich businessmen (Luk 19:1-8) and he did praise entrepreneurial and profit (Mat 25:14,21,23). And he did reprove his disciples for suggesting to sell luxury goods spent on Him and distribute the proceeds to the poor (Mat 26:10). He denied being a revolutionary (Mat 5:17) He was no rebel nor a libertine, and preached obedience to the law (Mat 5:19; Mar 12:17). He preached compromise (Mat 5:25) and opposed divorce (Mat 5:32). And Jesus did of course reiterated that mankind is in a fallen and imperfect state and preached that only faith in him could save it (Luk 19:10; Joh 8:7,32). He forbade killing humans [abortion] (Mat 5:21; 10:19), and Paul as a mouthpiece of Christ confirmed the Biblical prohibition of homosexuality (Rom 1:26-27; 1Co 6:9).

The Leftist tend to twist some sayings of Christ as supporting their stance, but these references, however, clearly have more to do with spiritual guidance than with advice about how to run the affairs of the world: "It is easier for a camel to pass through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God" (Mat 19:24) but added "With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible", and he did tell a seeker after holiness to first sell all his worldly goods (Mat 19:21). He did advise, "giving freely" and advised against accumulating both money and worldly goods (Mat 10:9,10; 6:19 and 6:31-34). He preached equality among the faithful (Mat 20:25-28). And he was a man of peace (not a pacifist, see Temple scene) but would have protected and defended His own family (Mat 5:39). These things are not Leftists or Rightists, but required by all men to live a good peaceful life (1Ti 2:2ff).

It suits Leftists to pretend to believe that Christ's spiritual teachings can be taken as a pattern for organizing the world’s affairs the way they see it. That the world will always fall far short of the high ideals that Christ set, they ignore and that without Him we can do nothing: "I am the vine, you are the branches: He that stays in me, and I in him, the same brings forth much fruit: for without me you can do nothing." (Joh 15:5)

In this sense, Leftism is akin to the old Pelagian heresy that claimed that perfection can be obtained in this world by oneself, whilst Christ himself was emphatic that, although perfection is to be sought (Mat 5:48), it is only to be obtained through faith in him (Joh 3:18). As Jesus summarized it to Pilate, "My Kingdom is not of this world" (Joh 18:36).

The bottom line is that the teaching of Jesus does show realism when He discusses the state of the world that is encouraging to Rightist (conservative) views of it.

Jesus commanded us; his disciples individually and collectively, to feed the hungry, cloth the naked, care for the sick, and visit the imprisoned. These are not the duties of governments, whose role is primarily to provide order through laws, police, and necessarily at times, armies. He has warned us that everyone is a sinner, implying that we must be wise in placing our faith in men, especially as it concerns the hungry, naked, sick, and imprisoned. Plainly, it is not a government’s job to help poor widows, orphans, and disabled people, to provide health care, or reconcile victims to those who have harmed them; we must not turn our responsibilities over to it.

For many years, only Christians did Christian charity, when the word charity still had a positive meaning. They started schools to teach their children, orphanages to care for children without parents, hospitals to nurse the sick back to health, and ministries of various kinds to serve widows, the homeless, prisoners, and those who suffered other kinds of distress. They organized to fight societal ills such as slavery and alcoholism, but they worked to change minds and serve people, not to create government programs or give the government more power. We might also want to avoid giving sinners even greater power, which they may well be expected to abuse. For example, the enormous redistribution of monies from working people to the poor, supposedly, has not ended poverty. Instead, more dependent poor receive more money and have become a class of perpetual victims.

Clearly the Bible teaches that each family should look after its own: "But if any widow have children or nephews, let them learn first to show piety at home, and to requite their parents: for that is good and acceptable before God." "But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he has denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." (1Ti 5:4,8)

With the decline of the authority of Judeo-Christian values in the West, many people stopped looking to external sources of moral standards in order to decide what is right and wrong. Instead of being guided by God, the Bible and religion, Europe is looking elsewhere for moral and social guidelines, but what saith Scripture: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” (Jer 17:9)

With the ascendancy of leftist values that has followed the decline of Judeo-Christian religion and the disintegration of the family, personal feelings have supplanted established absolute standards. In fact, feelings are the major unifying characteristic among contemporary liberal positions. For many millions leftists their guidelines are just feelings. If it feels good, then do it. But Scripture says that he that wavers (driven by feelings) is like a wave of the sea driven by the wind and tossed here and there having an uncertain course: "That we from now on be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;" (Eph 4:14)

The entire edifice of moral relativism, a foundation of leftist ideology, is built on the notion of feelings deciding right and wrong. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. By feelings today we reach the stars; tomorrow we wallow in the stalls, "Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die."

"War is not the answer" the Leftists cry, which is demonstrably false and morally ignorant. Almost every great evil has been solved by war; from slavery in America to the Holocaust in Europe. Auschwitz was liberated by soldiers making war and not by pacifists who would have allowed the Nazis to murder every Jew and other "unfits" in Europe. Similarly, the present conflict with Islam will only be resolved by war. Have "warmonger" America get rid of its armament, totally, and see how many months will pass before she be utterly invaded and destroyed. Look at every nation in the world, at all times, as long as they were militarily strong they survived well, but when they became pacifist, artistic and fun loving, they were swallowed up by "Barbarians", as Europe will be soon. 

Not to have wars is surely a good thing, but unfortunately there is always someone over the fence that is always ready do have them, so what do you do?  Let them impose on you and let them kill yours in front of your own eyes ??  And let us not forget that Stalin, that great Leftist, has put 60 million to death, of his own people. A proverb: "The only thing a mad 'dog' understands is a solid kick in the snout".  

As a Christian I am definitely a man of peace, but not a pacifist, if anyone attacks my family or those I am responsible for, I will defend them as Abraham did, for I wish not to be an infidel: "But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he has denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." (1Ti 5:8)

In conclusion: "Can a true Christian be a Leftist"? The plain clear answer to this question is a reverberating NO! The Judean/Christian values are perfectly contrary with every single liberal/leftist feeling. A Christian that considers himself a Leftist needs to have his bearing readjusted, indeed the concept of a Christian/Leftist is impossible to imagine if the Holy Spirit is truly at work in him.