But I do think you’re deeply conflicted in your commitments, and that you have embraced conflicting imperatives, and so are forced to harbor positions that simply contradict each other… for example, on the matter of “non-violent” socialism.

You seem to want me to accept you as a “Christian brother” who is “just as right” as I am. I accept you as a Christian brother… but I cannot agree that you are “as correct” about that means as I believe myself to be. Not that I’m some paragon of understanding and wisdom, but of course I think my positions are closer to the truth than yours.

So, again, I accept that you mean well. But it seems to me that your priorities are very far away from those I see in the New Testament, and that the methods you espouse for achieving those priorities are disastrously dangerous for society to embrace. I assume you believe the same about me… and so we discuss.

Again: if you are for socialism, you CAN’T be for non-violence, because the very essence of socialism is coersion to make people do what they would not otherwise do, in order to benefit someone else. Socialism HAS to have the threat behind it in order to “work,” to the limited extent that it does work.

On the other hand, classical liberalism, promoting maximum freedom, has very little in the way of coersion to make people DO things for others people, and uses coersion primarily to prevent people FROM DIRECTLY HURTING other people.

Both sides use power… but one is trying to make people DO good, the other merely tries to prevent people from doing evil. So that, in socialism, EVERYONE feels the power, coersion, and threat of violence from the government pressing down on them, whereas in classical liberalism, only people who desire to do ill to others feel the power of government restricting them.

That’s why with the best of intentions, socialists are dangerous people… precisely because they may decide to use even more power tomorrow, on everyone in the society.

I thought by now you would have had time to read the e-mail from my friend Katherine Harris.
I am sure she explained to you well that I grew up in a conservative Christian school and tirelessly stood up for my beleif against the crowd of conservatives! I have stood up for my belief in God, Church, and progressivism, for the past 12 years and of course as a child it was a learning experience, growing stronger in my faith. Just as you walked to the Right, I walked to the Left in my spiritual journey.

Katherine said you were very concerned about me, and I am grateful yet…I smiled. There was a time when a nice elder at my church exclaimed, “How did a fiathful young christian like you got infected with communism!!” If that is your sentiment, relax!! I am not mad communist fanatic under the thrall of a sinister puppet master!! I am a friendly, born-again, passionate young Christian you meet in your campus, just with a “little peculiar beliefs”.

Oh of course, I changed my views over time! I used to be an anti-communist until I was 11 years old, I was a 6-day creationist until I was 14, I supported racial purity until I was 18,
I flirted with liberation theology when I was in high school, I supported mercy killing/euthanasia when I was a high school senior, I hated Japan for what it did to Korea and wanted it to be punished…. And I changed!! I was wrong about some of my values and I discarded so I could grow stronger in my faith and values as a christian! My gosh,…did you…did you think I was a dogmatic person?? Would I even have read your post if I was such an obstinate leftist?

In fact, I have continued to reach out to conservativs. I attended Conservative Political Action conference (CPAC)4 times, Family Research Council Values Voter Summit 3 times, said hello to Phyillis Schlafly, shook hand with RNC chair Michael Steele, said thank you to Sen. Sam Brownback for his work, honored the 911 memorial on campus, wrote against same-sex marriage on my campus newspaper editorial, was praised by my campus COLELGE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT FOR BEING THE REPUBLICAN’S FAVORITE DEMOCRAT!!
Find me another liberal who tried this hard to communicate with those on the Right, Mr. Harmonminer. And you know what, I “pandered to the right”(as my liberal friends complain) not because I was confused, but because I was confident about my faith in progressivism to walk into the “den of conservatives and stay true to my values.”

Oh I read your recommended reading, Liberal Fascism. Quite entertaining. But Mr. Harmonicminer…..sigh….did you think that book will somehow scare me to abandon my values?

I am not a fascist, Mr. Harmonicminer. Goldberg’s definition of fascism, well its his opinion only. Fascism and Socialism were two competing ideology of the 20th century, and sure we shared similarities but our goals were different (they were masculine, we were feminine to use Goldberg’s definition). And socialims too has many forms, some more vibrant than others. American lbieralism is mixture of capitalism and socialism, so really a mild dose designed to reform the market system. One point I did agree with Goldberg is that American conservatism oriented from classic liberalism, and not related to fascism. But see again? Most liberals would have simply ignored that book, but I, taking your advice at least read it two time(more thoroughly the 2nd time), and repsectfully disagreed with most of its analysis.

The point of my “outcry”(?) is because I am concerned that you might perceive me as some sort of deluded puppet of liberal professor! I was a progressive when I was in same school at Katherine Harris, and throughout my life I have explored my values while communicating with those on the Right. And I assure that I am not the only evanglical leftist who is like this.

Our disagreements…are unfortunate. I am sorry you “betrayed”(?) us, but accept your conversion to the Right. All I ask…. Mr. Harmonicminer, as fellow brother in Christ, is that you accept the commitment of your Leftist Brethens as genuine/acceptable and seek harmony (and respectful debates) with us. Or, as Wesley said, “In Essentials, Unity, In non-Essentials, Diversity. In All Things, Charity”

Amen.

The main point of this comment: I am not trying to convince YOU of anything, because your thoughts are locked in concrete, it seems. (A question: do YOU have a history of having one perspective that you were sure of, and then, in the face of new evidence, changing it? I DO. If you do, perhaps I still have hope for you… but if not, I won’t try. I will say this: I once believed approximately as you do… and then I learned more about theology, church history, world history, economics, political science and philosophy… which more than changed my mind, though it took about 15 years for the process to complete.) But I am trying to convince other readers that your perspective, well-intentioned though it may be, is simply deeply in error, and leads to evil results when believers in it prevail in society.

Why should I trust a man who says what Rev. Wallis says:

Don’t go left, Don’t go right, Go deeper!

but then always goes LEFT when it really matters, at election time when candidates are seeking his endorsement? His little saying is clearly only a rhetorical device to allow him the pretense of balance and objectivity. You don’t hear people on the Right saying such things very much… that’s because they know it is inherently a dishonest tactic.

You’re attachment to Marxist thought is SO wrong that it, almost more than the abortion issue, gives me real pause about your understanding of your Christian commitment. Abortion in the USA has killed 50 million in the last 45 years or so. Marxism has killed over 100 million… and if you add in other flavors of socialism, many of which have Marxist roots, we’re up to 150 million, at least.

How many have been killed by capitalism?

Your willingness to use violence to enforce the theft of money from those who work, to give it those who don’t, is very disturbing to me. You characterized it as “urging the rich with taxes.” It is far more than “urging.” It is legalized theft backed up by the threat of violence. And the fact is that enormous amounts are confiscated from the merely middle class to pay for those who choose not to work, or to pursue destructive lifestyles that make it impossible for them to work, or who, knowing all along that the government would take care of them, did not or do not make adequate provision for themselves, and those for whom they are responsible.

You ask the wrong question about the rich/poor issue. The question is not, “Why are there so many poor?” The question is, “How did the rich get rich, and what can we do to help others do the same?”

The biblical rich were uniformly very powerful politically. The modern rich, in western society, may or may not be politically powerful. More often than not, the rich in modern western nations are simply people who live in nicer homes, drive nicer cars, wear better clothes, eat nicer food, etc., but who do NOT abuse some kind of power over “the poor” in the way that Jesus warned against in the Gospels.

Jesus over-riding concern was abuse of power, not economic distribution.

By the way, I have read Campolo, Wallis, etc. I’ve been around awhile…

But I have to wonder about the motives of a person who is willing to hold a gun to someone’s head (or have someone else do it for them) in order to extract property which is to be given to someone else, just a straight transfer of property, no exchange, no common interest, just Robin Hood ethics in full flower.

That is an INTENSELY unBiblical view. You can’t find any significant support for it in scripture… which leaves me wondering why people believe it as a Christian teaching, and why they haven’t learned from the tragic history of the last century.

Jong Eun, I hope you’ll continue to read my blog, and feel free to comment as you see fit. I am sure you mean well. I have written at considerable length about most of these matters elsewhere in the blog, which you can find, if you’re interested, by searching in the black title bar at the top.

I thought I sent you a long response, but yours is even longer.
First of all, thank you believing in me, and in my faith and passion to do what is right and moral! .

However, if the discussion turns into which of our political philosophy is more correct, than this debate will be endless(as it touches upon the very core of the existance of our two competing groups)!!

Mr. Harmonicminer, you say we on the left adopted anti-Christian viewpoints. Yet, you too say anti-Christians can come up with great ideas(Yes, I have great respect for Karl Marx, who spoke against the evils of capialism). Of course, Karl Marx was limited in his understanding of the Truth, because he rejected divine authority, and so his “billiant doctrine of communism” should be understood in light of scripture(like, there won’t be uptopia because people are sinful). But I believe, God had given Marx certain wisdom to analyze the workings of class struggle(if only he was a Christian!!). (Karl Marx, yet another topic we disagree upon).
Sure Mr. Harmonicminer, some ideas out there will oppose Christianity, (Holocust?). We don’t mindlessly adopt what is the new “hot idea out there”. But we seek to purify, and Biblizalize the ideas of man. Christian environmentalism(environmentalism with Biblical concept), Christian socialism(socialism with Biblical concept), Christian capitlism(capitalism with Biblibcal cocnept), Chrisitan internationalism,(international with Biblical concept) list goes on, simply because each of us have incorporated different versions of philosophy.
for an instance, in my view Katherine Harris is a Chrisian Capitalist, with Americanistic libertarian/individualism(right Katerine?).

Christian philosophy will inevitably be diverse(so long as we do not question the dinviity of Christ), which is why we have the Christian Right and Left(and some in the center).

So I am not too worried about our philosophical difference. And this discussion on socialism…that’s another long debate since it’s clear you don’t like socialism and I do, so on nearly every policy, you and I will be reaching different conclusion(like for an instance,what’s wrong with rich people helping poor people and govt. urging them on with taxes if they don’t do it volunarily?You think it’s stealing, I think it’s justice, so our interpreation differs).

I will read “liberal fascism” again more careflly as you suggested as see what useful ideas I can learn from fascism(with Biblically based prudence, of course. I wouldn’t start advocating concentration camps i promise you).

i too would like to suggest you if you have not to read, book written by great Christian progressives, such as tony Campolo and Rev. Jim Wallis. They will articulate well that Evangelical progressivism is well grounded on Christian tradition.

Our difference….well we have differences, I understand. After decades of debates, lifetime of debate, our side and your side will still differ. I don’t think we have the power to changed that, only Jesus can when he returns. So what should we do? Call each other heretics and engage in inter-church conflict, breaking the heart of Jesus? No we both know that’s wrong. So how about we(listening to my freind Katherine), ackowledge that we have reached different, but understandable different conclusion, still have debates on the effectiveness of our policies and grow stronger together in our Lord Jesus christ and his church(or as Rev. Wallis always says, Don’t go left, Don’t go right, Go deeper!).

So in that logic, it’s all right for me to support Obama, my candidate for change and it’s all right for you to support Mccain/Palin, you canddiate for change. Right? Fair and balanced, respect and charity for all well-intentioned Chrisitans!(and you know what? If PresidentObama doesn’t do a good job, then we can always vote him out in 2012)

I was wondering when you would visit your professor’s blog. Thank you for introducing me to your mentor, even though….I think (tragically) that more we discuss, more we find that we disagree.
Thank you for explaining to Mr. Harmonimner and Mr. Old Cop(is he your friend too?) that trying to turn me into a republican/conservative isn’t very liklely to work(You know well my passion for progressive philsophy).
Thank you accepting the solidariy of Christians REGARDLESS OF THEIR POLITICAL AFFILIATION. And yes, we need to join forces together to combat abortion, using all the tactics we have(you are not as hardline as I thought, lol just kidding).

Katherine, believe it or not, Democratic Party was once a conservative, pro-state’s right, pro-segregation party. It gradually changed thanks to the tireless efforts of its more liberal members. Or if you perfer a rightward example, gun control is an issue where the moderate wing of the Democratic party has gained grounds(did you know Howard Dean got A rating from Natl. Rifle associaiton?).

Sometimes old ideas can emerge, and they can be powerful. We on the left congrautlated ourselves that Kenseyian economic was indomitable, only to see Milton Friedman leading the reemergence of free-market economics! you will be surprised Katherine, but many of my pro-choice colleagues are worried, even cofnused that pro-life(or anti-choice they call it) still stays strong, and gains support from young people!! We on the left are in fact, very very worried about the persuasive power of the RIGHT!(Rush Limbaugh!! Glenn Beck! Dr. Dobson!)

Mr. Old Cop, thank you for your response. Thank you for calling me gracious..even though I must confess I am little hurt that you seem to not still wholly trust me and my group’s Christian faith. Your passion for unborn I deeply appreciate(and I think so would Jesus), and though our “tactics” one day, in heaven, I hope you would realize that we complement each other.

Hang on Mr. Harmonicminer, I have to think HARD about your LONG ANSWER.

The main point is that in modern socialist thought, no one really owns anything except the government (which occasionally deigns to give something back to us, and calls it a “refund,” as if someone is getting some fun back). So the suffix of the word “dissohnia” has been dropped in contemporary usage. That’s how the word got shortened to “diss” (the second “s” being retained to aid proper pronunciation), which simply means “without.”

That’s what makes “diss” (meaning “without”) the perfect word for conversation about socialism, since indeed, in socialist economies, most people eventually ARE without… without opportunity, without redress, without options, without hope, and without lunch, let alone cancer treatment or a heart transplant.

The common phrase “I’m gonna disownya, baby,” can now be understood as a transliteration into colloquial English that retains both the original meaning and original pronunciation of “dissohnia.”

So if you’re feeling dissed by the feds, don’t sweat it. So do the rest of us. And if some sectors of society continue in their current trends, and the government continues to encourage them to do so, we’ll soon be without a next generation, too….

Call it the ultimate DISS.

I bid you good night. If I had known I was appealing to people’s emotions and prejudices instead of their ability to think or that my tactics were dishonorable and contrary to the high standards of conduct expected of somebody, I would have certainly not entered into the fray, as it were.

In the future, I will endeavor to be less emotional and disrespectful in the discussion of a matter which entails very little emotion. I realize now that the SENSELESS KILLING OF CHILDREN should be handled with the utmost coolness and honor. And that I should not hold the present Marxist regime and prior left wing lunatic regimes responsible for their conduct.

Obviously my dear professor I am being disingenuous as I have no intention changing my ignoble or ad-hominem tactics.

See you tomorrow.