For Mia Country

Bruce Kent

My family and I spent a portion of our weekend conducting a precinct walk in behalf of candidate Mia Love. As I listen to poll reports, I find myself struck in awe by the nearness of the run between her competitor Doug Owens and herself. Beyond this race, I feel surprised at how many voters in Utah continue supporting the kind of candidates that commit what Dinesh D’Souza and Frederick Bastiat call “legalized plunder” (2014).

In a recent class discussion a peer of mine provided the late Hugh Nibley with all kinds of accolades. I remember recently reading about Nibley while in a local bookstore where I discovered, to my great surprise, that Nibley voted Democrat. Had he never read about the 1964 Civil Rights Act? Had he no understanding of the progressive movement? Had he no understanding of government and constitutional tenets? Did he truly comprehend the Book of Mormon, which records in detail the calamities of an ancient kingdom—including the fight against the kingmen, the Gadianton Robbers (the grievance mongers of their time), and other dissenters and corrupters of law? Had Nibley ever read about how the Democrats moved against the emancipation of the slaves? And what about their treasonous acts during the Vietnam conflict, and those they carry out today in the interest of soul-destroying welfare programs? Was Nibley, too, a racist?

I don’t know all the answers to the above questions. What I know is that the Democrat party, and some Republicans, operate as progressives whose policies have done much harm to my posterity’s rights by forming a veritable industry of legalized plunder, wherein the government uses corrupt laws which pervert the original purpose of all governments, which is to protect the rights of man; they steal from the laborer to give to the idle in the interest in political power. Franklyn D. Roosevelt did it. Wilson advocated for it. The Bushes did it. Clinton did it. I think even Reagan may have done some of it. Of course, none have matched the audacity with which our progressive President Obama has done it with.

When my classmate complemented Nibley for his ostensibly keen intelligence, I wanted to cry out: He could not have been that smart since he was a progressive Democrat. Indeed the party or individual which wishes to use the power of government to steal from another without his consent to secure power, lucre, and popularity has enslaved the people. Meanwhile, the government which remains interested in its objective purpose, which John Locke described as protecting the right of property and life, also allows the people to trade freely, to barter, to innovate, and to defend intellectual and real property. I yearn for such a government.

In a separate discussion, which I held with a different classmate of mine, my classmate claimed he was a conservative and then shortly thereafter expressed his support of the “social justice” movement. Specifically, he said he believes in social justice. How can nominal conservatives support any form of so called social justice? I thought. Do my conservative peers not understand the intent behind its purveyors? Do they not know the truth of the movement? Of course, social justice remains an outgrowth of the modern grievance hustlers and the socialist movement of contemporary and former days. It advocates for redistribution (legalized plunder). While I admit Capitalism isn’t perfect, it’s the closest thing to perfect governance this world will ever come to because of its ability to provide for collective uplift through the invisible hand; through freedom to innovate, barter, and trade. Plainly, history proves socialism is just another form of tyranny.

One can make the argument that the people of Enoch knew of and practiced a higher form of law, which allowed the people to have all things of common. I do not dispute the facts. What I dispute is the notion that the people of Enoch practiced socialism. Socialism makes use of the coercive powers of government to force people to divide their private property and opportunity. This was Satan’s plan from the beginning. Not convinced? Read the scriptures. And, after reading the scriptures, study the history behind socialism, including its indiscreet ties to atheism, its promotion of dominance by force, its acceptance of Darwin’s survival of the fittest routine, its denigration of all things sacred (including private property rights and sex), and the wickedness of its purveyors here in the United States (see Saul Alinsky, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Bill Ayers, John Dewey, and others).

Many contend that because libertarians aren’t in the business of legalized plunder they don’t care about the poor and the needy. Nonsense! Benjamin Franklyn said that the way to take care of the poor involves making the individual responsible for himself. And, if the individual cannot temporarily (or permanently) take care of himself, the job falls to the family of the individual. After all the family can do, private charities remain in place by men of adequate ardor whose laws allowed them to innovate and to prosper, who can and have historically assisted the needy in great philanthropic efforts—a job the private man can do far more effectively than the distant, centralized power of government. Finally, if all these other systems fail to care for the needy, I suppose the government must play its role. But in playing that role, the government must not abuse its power by stealing from the people or through intimidation. The government must establish a system of checks and balances to reign in the abuse or potential abuse of such power; and it must ensure temporary assistance and insufficient assistance plays the vital role so as to force the man to work for his own subsistence, if he is able (Skousen, 2009).

Our own brothers and fathers have forgotten the important lessons learned by the Founders about the role of government in our lives. One ostensible crisis after another has led us down the path to tyranny. It is up to the living to defend and secure the rights of their posterity. It falls on us to learn all we can about government, history, science, and so on—we cannot rely on the government anymore to inform our discretion adequately. The government is corrupt, intentionally corrupt, because of the men and women our brethren have supported in office.

If we would live smart, we will vote for the candidates who will serve the fundamental role of government and get the hell out of the way of freedom and prosperity, beginning with allowing men to worship God in truth, whether publicly or privately. At last we can then receive the privilege of correcting our wayward laws and bringing the guilty—whom this government have delivered from justice for lucre, recognition, and power—to justice under law.

As for the race between Mia Love and Greg Owens: May the best woman win! And, in the end, may the people of the United States repent, turn to God, and restore precious liberty and prosperity to the land again beginning this November.

Powered by Facebook Comments