My Take: Jesus was a free marketer, not an Occupier
To use the parable of the minas to claim that Jesus was a free marketer is simply political spin. Keep in mind that Mr. Perkins is the leader of the "Family Research Council", which is one of the most vile homophobic organizations around. The FRC has made it their mission to malign single mothers, poor people, and gay people.
When I read the parable of the Minas, I see industriousness being rewarded and sloth being punished. I see nothing of "free markets".
The reason I doubt Mr. Perkin's "free market" comparison is because of what Jesus actually said (not in a parable) to a wealthy young man who asked what he should do to inherit eternal life:
"If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." Matthew 19:21
The boy went away sad, unwilling to give up his vast wealth to help the poor. Then Jesus turned to his disciples and said:
"And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." Matthew 19:24
So, Jesus seems to deplore greedy people who horde wealth and do nothing for the poor. Keeping that in mind, the parable of the Minas (Luke 19) seems to be about rewarding industriousness and punishing sloth.
I would like to point out some fallacies that Mr. Perkins also attempts to pass in his article:
1. He states that "each of us is given the same opportunity to build our lives", which is demonstrably false. The child of an auto mechanic doesn't have the same opportunities as the child of a doctor. The child of a welfare mother does not have the same opportunities as the child of an auto mechanic.
2. He talks about "occupiers" who trash public property, and engage in anti-social behavior. I don't believe the intent of OWS is to "trash" anything. Many of the nasty pictures people see are AFTER the encampment has been trashed by the police. The OWS camps that I visited (in Seattle and Minneapolis) were clean and well organized. I'm not sure what anti-social behavior he is referring to. OWS is collaborative and sociable by it's very nature. Rioting is anti-social, but it seems to have only happened in Oakland. Oakland has a history of rioting, which cannot be associated with OWS.
3. He states that "wins and losses are determined by the diligence and determination of the individual". If our "free market" system were truly merit / results based, there would be no reason for OWS to exist. OWS exists because of a peculiar blend of "laissez faire" / crony capitalism, and merit / results NOT being rewarded. OWS exists because the economic and political systems have been corrupted by power, influence and money.
4. He states that "[abuses] are not inevitable or intrinsic to free enterprise". I tend to disagree! Totally free markets are prone to consolidation and manipulation. Mr. Perkins must be living on a planet inhabited by a species much more noble and honest than homo sapiens. Free markets can be beneficial until they are consolidated and manipulated by powerful players. Once that happens the entire system is liable to crash. There are few forces on earth that can challenge the powerful players that manipulate markets, and government regulation is one of them. The fact is that Mr. Perkin's political party has meticulously gutted every state and federal financial regulatory agency.
He closes by saying: "our free market system works when bridled by morality. Not arbitrary morality that changes with political parties, but transcendent moral principles."
Mr. Perkins is again talking about his fantasy planet.
Perhaps on Kolob (planet where God lives according to Mormons), Mr. Perkins morality guides the markets. I suspect that morality guides those markets because Jesus is standing near the opening bell with a whip!
On the planet Earth, the morality of homo sapiens is easily over-run by greed when "no one is watching". Since Jesus isn't standing on Wall Street with a whip, we need some way of controlling the greed, consolidation, and manipulation.
Republicans like to champion the "self regulation" doctrine, while ignoring the complete and repeated failure of that doctrine.
I personally don't support overbearing regulations. But I support regulations that ensure the safety, sustainability, and fairness of industry and markets. Based on results, industry and markets are unable to properly enforce rules even if they make the rules.
I also don't support the idea that OWS should be sleeping in parks. Not only is it an eyesore, it tends to lead to unhygienic conditions. It also has a tendency to attract elements that most Americans would consider deplorable (drugs, prostitution, etc.). People will pay more attention to clean, organized, peaceful protesters than they will dingy, chaotic, rowdy protesters.
IMHO
No comments:
Post a Comment