WHAT'S NEW

About
My Other Blog
Blog Schedule
NEW
Movie Links
08/13/2026
Past Blog Posts
Various &
a Sundry Blogs Update 07/03/2026
Favorite
Websites--updated 07/03/2026'
My Stuff
On The Web, Updated 06/28/2026
Audio-Visual Updated: 08/027/2026
Favorite
Articles --
last updated 08/13/2026
This Month's Scripture Verse:

1 But false prophets also appeared among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. 2 Many will follow their indecent behavior, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; 3 and in their greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep..
II Peter 2:1-3

SEARCH THIS BLOG

Showing posts with label May Day. Show all posts
Showing posts with label May Day. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 6, 2025

May Day With The Dems

 Being a socialist, May Day has a bit of a different meaning for me than it does for many Democrats. For one thing, we socialists have been speaking up for immigrants far longer than the Dems though perhaps with too much of an edge. But that is because we have been aware of what immigrants have had to face long before both the Dems expressed concerned and Trump came to power.

However, not all of us socialists are the same. Some focus also on empowering workers at the workplace regardless of their ideologies while others are pushing an ideological agenda too hard. Stalinists are an example of the latter. 

Also, I got introduced to Antifa during a May Day event. I talked with them in person. Though Antifa can stand for being anti-fascist, there is an organized group called 'Antifa' some of whose members told me that they are reliving the street battles that communists were fighting in  Germany in the late 1920s and early 1930s.

I was just celebrating my first May Day with the Dems and it was very laid back which was both good and bad. While the socialists I've celebrated May Day with have too much of an edge, the Dems have too little of one. 

Plus, the Dems have a more narrow view of the workers' needs than socialists do. What socialists see that Dems don't is that workers need to have power in the workplace in addition to unionizing which allows them to enter into collective bargaining to negotiate for both better pay and working conditions. And so unions are there to help prevent businesses from exploiting and abusing workers.


A protest sign at May Day rally. The quote is from the movie 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail'. It is response to King Arthur when he identifies himself as the King of England to a couple of peasants.

The Dems approach is to portray themselves as vanguards for workers. That means that the Dems will represent the demands and needs of the workers in government in exchange for their support. But it also means that the Dems are not empowering workers in the workplace. In addition, the Dems are heavily influenced by money from corporations. The result is that the Dems can have a conflict of interest when representing workers.

Socialists enable workers in multiple ways. Not only do socialists work to represent the concerns of workers, they also seek to empower them.  Socialists want workers to go beyond what unions do by adding to their collective bargaining rights, positions of power both in businesses and the government. An example of workers gaining power in the work place can be seen in Germany's codetermination laws that allow for a percentage of workers to be placed on a business's executive  boards depending on the number of employees a business has.

Without those positions of power, workers have no partial ownership of the businesses that employ them. Such workers have no say in how a business operates and treats its other stakeholders. Workers have no say as to the direction a business will take and where it locates or relocates. And unless workers are also included in Congress, they have less to say as to what regulations, which would protect people and the environment, will be written and passed. 

And so the approach taken by the Dems, who are already compromised by corporate money, cannot represent workers like socialists could if socialists were given a chance.

In addition, socialists have justice concerns that extend beyond the borders of their own nations. Socialists are concerned about the injustices that come with American imperialism. Unfortunately, some socialists are so focussed and American imperialism that they let the injustices practiced by other nations, such as Russia's invasion of Ukraine, fly in under the radar. The same occurs with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict where some socialists are so focussed on the injustices practiced by the Israeli government that they give hall passes to Palestinian terrorism. On the other hand, while, for the most part, the Dems are rightly reacting and responding to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, many of them overlook both the injustices that come with American imperialism and with those practiced by the Israeli government.

And so there is a difference between celebrating May Day with my fellow socialists than with the Dems. Both groups have contributions to make and faults to change. But if the Dems want to present a more contrasting and positive alternative to the Repubs, they will refuse to be influenced by corporate money and will keep what they rightly doing  while moving closer to how socialists analyze and approach problems and injustices.

In the eyes of many of my fellow socialists, I am slumming it when protesting with the Dems. That is because of the differences, some of which were mentioned above, that exist between socialists and the Dems. I agree with my fellow socialists that we feel significantly offended when the Repubs call the Dems 'Marxists' or 'socialists.' Obviously, the Repubs like to oversimplify life by overlooking the significant differences that exist between socialists and the Dems. The Repubs tendency to over simply things appeal to many of its followers. 

At the same time, we socialists will be promoting injustices if we believe, as how Martin Luther King Jr. described the West, while speaking against the Vietnam War, when he said that it believe it had everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them. And so we socialists, and we are a very diverse group,  need to look for what we can learn from the Dems, the traditional Repubs, and even from the Trump's Repubs if we wish to avoid being narrow-minded ideologues with very small audiences. Narrow-minded ideologies ming appeal to those of us who embrace authoritarianism, but it also sabotages our efforts to bring change.





Friday, May 11, 2018

Can There Be A Christian Alternative To May Day?

Having just "celebrated" May Day in NYC last week, an article by Chris Gerhz (click here for a short bio) caught my eye for understandable reasons. The title of his article is The Cold War Origins Of A Christian Alternative To May Day (click here for the article).

Though not a Catholic, Gerhz retells how the Catholic Church responded to May Day. Though he starts his story about how Pope John Paul II employed a 100-year-old encyclical by Pope Leo XIII which warned of exploiting workers, John Paul II added to that a warning against 'unfettered capitalism' because it provided much to meet our material needs while neglecting to address our spiritual needs. Then he added the importance of unions to the cause of the worker. John Paul II did all of that on May 1st not just to honor workers on International Labor Day, but to also honor and bring Joseph, Mary's husband, into the picture. For May 1st is known to the Catholic Church as the feast to Joseph The Worker.

But the creator of the first Christian alternative to May Day was Pope Pius the XII. Gerhz noted that the Catholic Church had been opposing Communism (a.k.a., Bolshevism) with Pope Pius's XI warning that Communism was undermining Christian Civilization. Pope Pius XII was also concerned with the rise of Communism. Thus in 1955,  Pope Pius XII talked to an Italian trade union group. He said that in light of how falsely the Church has been accused of favoring the wealthy, he established the May 1st liturgical feast of Jospeh The Worker because of how Joseph's life as a worker qualifies him to represent workers. He then follows up with Dorthy Day's celebration of May 1st where she also references Joseph The Worker.

Gerhz then directs his attention to his fellow evangelicals. That, rather than supporting a candidate that promotes the exploiting working people, they should, in their own Protestant way, reflect on Joseph the Worker and work on how to respond to the problems of working people. He says that knowing that Protestants lag way behind Catholics in terms of social thought.

In order to adequately critique Gerhz's recounting of the first Christian alternative to May Day, we need to understand what workers need. The call for more unions, though a step in the right direction, is a call for inadequacy. Why? Because many people, especially owners of companies,  correctly look at unions as a foreign intrusion into private property despite the fact that unions are made up of a company's own workers. The problem is that unions still don't figure into a company's decision making structure. Rather unions seek their power through persuasion and that persuasion is sometimes threat-based. Yes, unions are better than nothing. But because they are a foreign entity, they have been greatly reduced in both numbers and power.

In addition, creating a Christian alternative to May Day also misses the mark. For it calls on Christians to separate from their fellow non-Christian citizens and fellow workers in trying to forge solutions for the working person. Yes, there are areas in life that we Christians do not share with non-Christians. And thus we Christians must decide alone on how to act in and view those areas. But work is not one of those areas. Work is an area which we share with non-Christians. Thus, for us Christians to develop our own views on work and how to respond to exploitation must seem rather arrogant to the many unbelievers.

We must also note that those who celebrate May Day as leftists do not make up a monolith. Bolshevism and its aftermath in the then totalitarian Soviet Union do not represent what many leftists believe. And thus, perhaps the Church could get over its phobia of leftists and work in conjunction with those leftists to jointly find solutions to the problems that working people face.

Perhaps the biggest problem that workers face in our Capitalist economy is something Marx noted about the Capitalism of his day: that workers are considered to be disposable objects of profit. Why? It is because our society has come to value wealth over work so that unless work leads to wealth, it is often seen as worthless. And even when it leads to wealth, the worker has not really achieved any real status until they have become wealthy.

The solution to the above problem is to make the position of the worker ingrained into the structure of every company. There are at least two distinct ways of accomplishing that. The first is to promote worker-owned companies that are democratically run by all who are employed. 


But such an option leaves out the many publicly-owned and rivately-owned companies that exist today. In addition, workers alone are not always able to raise the capital needed to start or maintain company. Thus, with such companies that have a significant size, we must change the structure of the company's leadership so that workers are well represented as part of that company's executive board. That is the idea behind Germany's codetermination policies. And though Germany's implementation of codetermination still leaves owners with having less power than owners, that can be changed so that workers and owners share power equally in their executive boards.

The problem with Capitalism and why it leans toward exploiting its workers is because it uses greed as the fuel for its engine. And that greed is willing to cut out all competitors who have claims on the wealth of a given company. Certainly, not all capitalist companies exploit their workers, but capitalist economic systems naturally lean toward exploiting others. And the Free Market delusion is that we can create such a market so that greed works for us without omitting any toxic emissions. 


The structures of capitalist companies often fail to account for those toxic emissions. That is because the structure of such companies tend to be top-down and those at the top are called on to represent those with wealth only. Thus the solution to the exploitation of workers requires more than just meditating on St Joseph The Worker, it requires changing the structure of companies so that workers are duly recognized by allowing workers and owners to equally share company decision making power. That increasing the power of the worker at work is a leftist idea. While recognizing  the rights of the owner is a capitalist  idea. So perhaps we need a hybrid of both the left and capitalism to enable companies to survive while paying due attention to the welfare of their workers.






Monday, May 7, 2018

ONIM For May 7, 2018

10 Best Fact Checking Sites Found Here.

If you are not sure about the validity of a news story linked to below, you can use  mediabiasfactcheck.com to check out the credibility of the source of most of the stories linked to here.


Christian News  

World News


Israel-Palestine News

 Donald Trump News

Pick(s) Of The Litter

Just For Fun


Tuesday, May 2, 2017

The Impersonal Is Defeating The Personal In America

On our last date day, the wife and I saw the movie Gifted. The basic plot of the movie consisted of a contest between the personal vs. the impersonal. Will not spoil the movie by saying which one wins, but we should note the conflict because this is what our nation is going through.

The war between the personal and the impersonal in our nation is being fought on two fronts. Martin Luther King Jr. observed the first front when he, during his speech against the Vietnam War,  told us that we are a thing-oriented society rather than a person-oriented society. According to King, being a thing-oriented society means that we value gadgets, profits, and property rights are treated as being more important than people.

The second front on which the personal and the impersonal are slugging it out could be seen in several cities in our nation today. The May Day celebrations brought out this second front. That front isn't necessarily political, though politics are included here. Rather, this second front consists of the ever increasing tribalism in our nation. As our loyalty to our own groups grows, our objectivity in seeing both our own groups' faults and the other groups' merits decreases until we see no faults in our own groups and no possible contributions being made by the groups we oppose. Thus, we can speak down to the people from those other groups and treat them as being less than ourselves. And we do that in the name and the glory of our tribe.

The reason why this second front is more evident on a day like May Day is because political/economic ideological tribes, which are Capitalists and Socialists, often confront each other in the streets.  Nothing is gained while each group simply yells derogatory comments at the other. In fact, I told a counterprotester

that the greatest threat to our nation is that we don't listen to each other. And that means that our groups compete to see who can control the nation. And while we can easily see the members of our own groups as people, it is getting more and more difficult to see the members of the other groups the same way. This tribalism can revolve around political ideology as was demonstrated today on May Day. But it can also be based on national identity, language, religion, a particular theology within a religion, and ethnicity.

With tribalism, as group loyalty grows, the more we canonize the members of our own group and the more we minimize the humanity of those from other groups. Because we don't see other groups as having any merit or anything to teach us, we act as if they don't deserve to be listened to. We silence them. And that is because we have dehumanized them. Yes, we recognize the personal that exists in those who belong to our own groups. But we don't do the same for those from other groups. Our group loyalties enable us to see those from other groups as being less than ourselves, less than human in some cases.

To show that the impersonal wins in tribalism, just reflect on how the verbal exchanges between two opposing groups have escalated. We saw this during the election, and many saw it during May Day. Each side was only trying to insult the other side enough to get under their skin, to make them mad. Why? Because while we allow the personal  to soar within our own group, we feel justified in silencing those from all other groups whom we believe to have nothing to contribute to either us or the general public. Sometimes the depersonalization of the other simply consists of simple verbal abuse. At other times, it can escalate to physical abuse. In either case, the goal is clear. Make sure that the other group(s) are marginalized in society.

The result of this tribalism is that groups compete to rule over all others. That eliminates the need to listen to, cooperate and collaborate with each other. And in trying to rule over all, the needs of many outside one's own groups are overlooked and neglected.


Allowing tribalism to help the impersonal win over the personal can be just an offshoot of the impersonal beating the personal when a society is more thing-oriented than person-oriented. We should note that Martin Luther King Jr had said that while we are more thing-oriented than person-oriented, we will have to deal with racism and war. In either case, we are minimizing the humanity of people whether it is people in general or those who belong to groups that oppose our own. Is it any wonder when the people in those opposing groups return the favor on us?







Tuesday, May 3, 2016

May Day Again!



May Day in NYC


While some cities might have had exciting May Day celebrations, the one in New York City was the same except that there were fewer people. The bad weather might have been one reason why the crowd was smaller  However, after listening to most of the speeches, my feeling is that the Socialist movement here might be suffering from attrition. For the speeches will do little to attract more members.

Now some conservatives might respond with a "what do you expect from socialists?" remark. And the answer is I don't expect Socialists to sound like every other group in America including its two major parties.

The strident all-or-nothing speeches were designed for the choir. Unfortunately, the choir is an already small audience. For any movement to grow, it must reach out to others. And for all that those speeches did, they didn't reach out to others. While the speakers said some horrible things about police officers in general, they were speaking to the choir. I have asked a couple of officers what they thought of what was said about them they counted what was said as just words. 

As the speakers spoke against Capitalism with great anger I wondered who of my friends would stay around to listen. It was a rhetorical wondering.

While the speakers described how immigrant families are targeted by officials or about how the US is interfering with the domestic concerns of other nations, I wished that my friends could be there to listen. But they would have never made it past the angry words spoken about the police. 

In short, the speakers at May Day resembled, in general, Democrats or Republicans when they talk amongs themselves. They also resembled the Conservatives I talk to on the blogs. What is the similarity between all of the groups? They all talk about needing to win control over all other groups. In other words, the two major political parties, many of the religious and political conservatives I talk with, and my fellow Socialists are acting like authoritarians. And for as long as we do that, Democracy will be dead because Democracy is about sharing power, not seizing it. And until my fellow Socialists of many stripes, except of course for the Stalinists who are irredeemable, continue to speak that way, they will never make any inroads into other groups and thus will never grow to a critical mass that could make a difference. 

I was interviewed two times. While being interviewed, I was asked about whether electing Trump would set our cause back. I had to say 'no' because we were to small and insignificant to be set back any further. However, the nation will pay dearly regardless of whether it is President Hillary or President Donald. So while the speeches fire up the crowd, because they are written for the choir, they accomplish little if anything.

Now before someone is ready to just write off the authoritarianism that I witnessed, we should note that not only do the two major parties speak in the same way, the leading candidate for each major political party are authoritarians themselves. And this says something about our nation. Democracy is dead here because we don't want it; we prefer to be saved/led by hero leaders. And if Democracy is dead, Socialism doesn't have a chance. 

For an alive Democracy would mean our involvement, participation, and constant vigilance. And neither Donald Trump nor Hillary Clinton are calling on Americans to exhibit those behaviors. Rather, each one is telling us that they alone have the qualificatoins that would enable them to get the job done.

In addition to speaking to fellow Socialists and listening to speeches, I spoke with some police officers and with counter demonstrators. The police I spoke to did not seem to fazed by any of proceedings. Their desire was that the celebration and march would be violence-free and I shared that wish. And for as long as I was there, there was no violence.

The counter demonstrators I spoke to were enthusiastic, easy to talk to, but they needed to do more thinking. As I talked to one counter demonstrator, we both agreed on workplace democracy and how places of employment should be run democratically by the workers. However, this person seemed unaware that such an idea is a Socialist one. I also mentioned that Rosa Luxemburg's criticisms of Lenin's "Communism" was that it was really a bourgeois dictatorship because workers were not the ones in control of the government.

I talked to another counter demonstrator about immigration. I ask him if he thought foreign policy issues and trade bills should be tied to our immigration bills. I then mentioned that the 3 top nations that have produced the most illegal immigrants in America are nations where we have either overthrown their government or made a disastrous trade agreement with. That was not his concern because he was focusing on the idea that the rule of law not kept by the government in terms of how they fail to legally handle immigration can be a gateway policy causing government to ignore other laws as well. I then asked what good is a law if people have to break it in order to survive violence and starvation.

Despite the kinds of speeches being made, it was certainly worth attending this year's May Day celebration. However, for as long as we Socialists are content with preaching to the choir, I am sorry to say that, for the foreseeable future, May 1 will be the only day I will get to celebrate with my fellow Socialists.




Wednesday, May 6, 2015

Comments Which Conservatives Block From Their Blogs For May 6, 2015


May 1

To Gavin Ortlund and his blogpost on when a leader falls. This appeared in the Gospel Coalition website.

Perhaps leaders letting us down is a reminder of how their pedestals should never be higher than a step or two.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Joe Carter and his blogpost on how same-sex marriage threatens Christian Schools. This appeared in the Gospel Coalition website.

There is a broader problem here. The Conservative Christian reaction against same-sex marriage has, for the most part, revolved around how its legalization will affect Conservative Christians. Very little attention is paid to issues of equality and how same-sex marriage has the potential of reducing promiscuity in the LGBT community which, in turn, could reduce the transmissions of STDs. Nor is there any discussion about the religious rights of those in the LGBT community who are not atheists and who believe that God blesses same-sex marriage.

This primary concern for how same-sex marriage affects us does not lead outsiders to want to hear the Gospel more objectively. The stance of many fellow Christians of associating calling homosexuality sin with marginalizing those in the LGBT community in society by not recognizing their equality is what will cause problems for Christians if same-sex marriage deemed constitutional. That is because this marginalization was a push on the pendulum and now the pendulum is returning to swing the other way.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

May 4

To Daniel Darling and his blogpost claiming that we cannot escape from the culture war. This appeared in the Gospel Coalition website.

Though I wouldn't classify poverty, racial injustice, and the need for prison reform as part of a culture war, at least these issues are being addressed along with same-sex marriage.

A culture war exists when one group's dominance is challenged. Usually, the challenger wants more than just deliverance from oppression, it wants to reverse the direction of the pendulum. And thus, instead of referring to culture war, we might want to itemize the wars around the issues they address and thus call them culture wars. And with some of those wars, we might want to consider engaging in a peaceful coexistence than a war. That, IMO, should be the case with the conflict over same-sex marriage.

But other things can't be tolerated such as racial injustice, prison conditions and incarceration rates, and poverty. And behind those issues are the bigger issues of economic exploitation, destruction of the environment, and war and militarism. On a personal level, it was Martin Luther King Jr who identified a thing oriented society as being behind much of the evil he opposed including racism. And he defined a thing-oriented society as being one where gadgets, profits, and property rights were more important than people. And thus, any culture war has to challenge the dominance of treating things as being more important than people.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

May 5

To Joe Carter and his blogpost about foster care rules restricting the religious freedom of foster parents to discuss the sexual orientation of their foster kids. This appeared in the Acton blog.

There are a number of sides to this issue. One is that the religious views of more than one group should be protected by the state. And the religious views of some people allow for, if they do not embrace, the sexual orientations of those in the LGBT community. And since foster parents have a position of power over foster children, a necessary line must be drawn to prevent the abuse of that power. We could  debate where that line should be drawn, but line's existence is necessary. 

In addition, what we in the religiously Conservative Christian Church need to wake up to is that we have, and continue to do so, relied on marginalization and shame to inhibit people from acting on their own sexual orientations. We have wanted people who have different sexual orientations than ours to not just feel estranged in the Church, we wanted them to be marginalized in society too. And perhaps, that is a reason for why the above mentioned line is drawn where it is. In any case, we can't wash our hands from the current situation because our past actions have helped to create it. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Elise Hilton and her blogpost parsing free trade. This appeared in the Acton blog.

We should note that our choice is not between free trade and no trade. And we should note that free here means that the voices and concerns of the communities involved in the trading have been silenced for the sake of those profiting from free trade. This trade is called "free" because the restrictions that might come about from the hearing of these voices are never considered. We should also note that free trade isn't always free trade. Many times, "free trade" agreements have pitted subsidized goods, such as our agribusiness products, against locally made goods and have thus benefited imports over a region's or nation's ability to provide for themselves.

But what most advocates of free trade fail to acknowledge is that the globalized labor market that comes from free trade has, by increasing supply, held stagnate or lowered wages of many working people. In addition, this expanded global labor market has caused many to lose their jobs and communities to lose their economic base. In the meantime, those controlling the terms of free trade prosper.

Examining the tradeoffs involved in free trade must be able to look out to horizon and see how all of the stakeholders of free trade are affect rather than just ask the political question: What is in it for me?


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Michael Severance and his blogpost comparing May Day and the feast of St. Joseph the worker. This appeared on the Acton Blog.

Here the question becomes this: If St. Joseph was being exploited for his work, separated from his family because of the need to travel to work, and was being abused by the police, how would he be celebrating May Day/ And why is it that, on this blog, the economic exploitation of both workers and the environment and the abuse of power never comes into consideration?

It seems to me that if one wants to honor Labor Day, one would insist that laborers be treated justly, that immigrants would be welcomed especially when they come here to escape violence and/or deprivation, and that abuse of police power would be challenged.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Elise Hilton and her blogpost about how raising the minimum wage will cause unemployment. This appeared on the Acton blog.

What is also priceless is the system that gives you a choice between being paid wages that require you to get gov't assistance and losing your job. Why is it that minimum wage is being challenged rather than the system?




Tuesday, May 5, 2015

Reflections On The Good And Bad Of NYC's May Day, 2015




I love May Day. On that day, I get to congregate with fellow Leftists. And this particular May Day would be special for two reasons: 1) I was eligible for a half-price bus ticket to NYC because of my age and; 2) I didn't know what to expect after the Baltimore riots. See, the May Day celebration in NYC has always addressed unjust law enforcement. 

Having gone down early so I could browse a couple of book stores,  I waited for the festivities to start. There were the usual speeches about workers' rights and how American Imperialism ties in with immigration problems. The speeches contained some good content as well as a justified anger at the current conditions and events.

While down there, I talked to a few police officers as well as some fellow leftists. What I wanted to know from the officers was how they felt about the celebration/protest. I know they could not give a personal opinion but I asked anyway. For a couple, they only cared about the protest being peaceful. Another officer stated that he would be glad to tell me what he thought if he was off duty.

I talked to a fellow leftist who was wearing the emblem from the flag of the Soviet Union on his shirt. This emblem has always bothered me and I count it as the leftist equivalent to the 'stars and bars' of the Confederate States of America flag. He made it clear that he didn't want a return of the old Soviet Union under Stalin. Instead, he wanted a new Soviet Union based on democracy. However, when I asked him about Lenin, he demonstrated the key weakness shared by many of the young protesters who participated: a lack of education. 

My leftist friend seemed quite unaware of the criticisms of Lenin made by some of his contemporaries from within the ranks. These criticisms came from people such as Rosa Luxemburg, Anton Pannekoek, and Karl Kautsky. Noam Chomsky (click here), not a contemporary of Lenin,  echos many of these criticisms when he states that when Lenin took control, his elite-centered takeover of the Revolution and his rule over Russia was, politically speaking, a turn to the Right. My leftist friend also did not know about the purges practiced by Lenin.

His lack of knowledge of Socialism seemed to typify the same in many of the young protesters. Many of these protesters were chanting 'shut the system down' and 'f___ the police.' They would also occasionally yell at bystanders who seemed to be well off. Such expresses the sentiments of Russia's Bolsheviks who wanted revolution to be followed by a centralized government under their control. These Bolsheviks would eventually go after anyone not belonging to their own group.

In contrast to the Bolsheviks were the Mensheviks. They were different from the Bolsheviks in at least 2 ways. First, The Mensheviks believed in the soviets. A soviet was nothing more than a workers' council where decisions were made. The Mensheviks wanted Russia to be ruled by the soviets. The Bolsheviks opposed that because decisions made by the soviets could be made independently. Second, the Mensheviks perceived that Socialism needed to take place in stages and develop over time for it to succeed.1 The Bolsheviks spoke revolution now because of a lack of patience. The result of how Lenin and the Bolsheviks pursued revolution was that they became another version of the Tsar's regime. Here we should ask if the slogans chanted by my young fellow Leftists indicate that they would follow the Bolsheviks' example if they had the opportunity to get power.

But if that is not enough, what the chants listed above showed was an ignorance what Martin Luther King Jr taught. King not only opposed external violence, he was against internal violence as well. Internal violence was the violence that comes from hating or being bitter. One way such violence is expressed is through words. Rather than fighting people, King sought to win his opponents over. And when that would not work and his opponents were oppressive, he sought to use the law to restrain their abusive behaviors. Here, we should note when one's goal is in winning people over, one is not seeking to conquer. 

Now, especially toward the end of his life, King was a fan of neither the Communism of the Soviet Union nor Western Capitalism. But he was a Socialist of sorts. He accomplished much in his life and he did that by trying to persuade rather than trying to intimidate or force people to join. So we should ask how the chants described above could possibly win over opponents. Rather, such chants were challenges supporting the survival of the fittest. Again, that was the kind of Socialism practiced by the Bolsheviks as they sought to dominate not just the counter-revolutionaries, but dissenting fellow Socialists as well.

In addition, regarding the chant aimed at the police, we have to consider the job of the police officer. There are at least several parts of a police officer's job that I could never do. Yes, the anger at those police officers who practice abuse and racism is justified. But the chant used against all police officers was not. And judging a whole group by the actions of some is nothing more than bigotry. We should also note that in nonviolent revolutions, which is the only kind where the revolutionaries do not seek to subjugate all, cooperation of those who enforce the law is required for success. This was shown in the removal of Milosevic from power in Serbia as well as in the Arab Spring.  And it was also shown when Chavez was briefly overthrown in Venezuela in the early 2000s, but he regained power when a massive number of peasants came into the city causing those who initially supported the coup to give up. If we are really concerned about conducting successful nonviolent revolutions, how is it that we can win over the police when we verbally attack them?

If the Left  is going to have a chance at changing this country, we must learn the history that tells us what has succeeded and what has failed. And we have to decide is whether we prefer to conquer others or persuade our opponents to join us. If the young protesters at NYC's May Day celebration are a reflection of where the Left is, then those who afraid of its politics can rest easy not just for tonight, but for many nights to come.

References

  1. A People's Tragedy: The Russian Revolution 1891-1924, by Orlando Figes, pg 190, 211




Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Externalizing Evil Enables Evil

On Friday, May 1, there will be another May Day get together at Union Square in New York City (click here for flyer). Except in the United States, May Day is known as Labor Day and it is a day to celebrate the contributions which workers make to all of our lives. Unfortunately, workers are being more commodified and less celebrated today as the world becomes more enslaved than usual by the love of money. Trade agreements along with sold out democracies have allowed the wealthy to exploit a growing number of workers during the past several years. 

Karl Marx explained how labor becomes a commodity in the Capitalist economic system. As people provide their labor for a set financial compensation only, such as with a wage, their work is being paid for in a similar enough way that raw materials and resources are being purchased. And we know what can happen when the same raw materials can be procured elsewhere at a lower price. Thus, old workers are often discarded and the new ones become employed. That means that workers are always in a tenuous state of employment and are considered to be disposable objects of profit. And as today's globalization expands the labor market, today's workers often lose their jobs to other workers as a way and this maximizes profits for business owners. Here business owners can refer to the people who own their own companies. But business owners can also refer to those who buy stocks for the sole purpose getting the greatest ROI.

So with the new globalization, we often see workers being displaced as new workers take their place. And we also see workers who migrate, are trafficked, are enslaved, work for poverty wages, or work in sweatshop conditions. Here, when it is said we see this, it isn't really us who see it, it those workers who are exploited who do. And one of the horrific and disillusioning failures of the conservative churches in America is that, for the most part, they not only keep silent, they provide spiritual havens for those who are a part of the economic machine that exploits labor. The silence of these churches on this matter shows how they themselves are sold out to the love of money. For they dare not offend members regarding the sins of our economic system.

And so the speeches one will hear at a May Day celebration, such as the one I will be attending in NYC, will often be loud and sound angry. Such speeches will turnoff many in the pampered Middle Class because those in the Middle Class live too comfortably to want to listen to anything that does not sound "nice" and soothing. 

But there is another problem here and it will be shared by all who will be participating. The problem is that those in business and government who profit from and thus support the exploitation in our economic system aren't the only ones who practice injustice; we all do too. We may do that in small ways on an individual basis, but we have all practiced injustice against others. We have all compromised standards for expediency. And thus we must be careful about how we want justice to be served. Do we want justice so that those who are oppressing and exploiting others are swiftly punished, or do we want justice by way of ending the oppression and exploitation? And along with this, do we want to punish those who are oppressing and exploiting others, or do we want our opponents to cross the line and join our side?

The advantage in focusing on the sins of others, such as what will happen during many of the speeches on May Day, is that we can lose sight of our own sins. We've seen this principle conveniently used by those seeking power in revolutionary movements. For all that some had to do during the French and Russian Revolutions was to assert that one's intramural rivals were really counter-revolutionary and it was off with their heads, the rivals' heads that is. And this could be done because of the binary worldview employed by many in the revolutions. To the revolutionaries, they were good and their opponents were evil. Thus, to be a counter-revolutionary was to be guilty and worthy of death. And we should note that many counter-revoluionaries also embraced their own version of a binary worldview. 

During the speeches, the concept, if not the word, amnesty will be promoted and cheered. There is a valid reason for supporting amnesty: no person's existence should be counted as being illegal. And what amnesty would do would be to discount the illegal entering of the country so that the person entering could legally stay. Amnesty here would release a person from the law's demands.

Jesus taught a form of amnesty. One example where He did this was in the Lord's prayer. It is found in the line that speaks of forgiveness (click here and see verse 12):
And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.

Here, Jesus is getting at a universal truth about people: that we all need forgiveness and that how we regard and treat each other should reflect that universal need. It is that universal need that those conservatives, who are adamantly against amnesty for "illegal immigrants," should reconsider their opposition to amnesty. But this universal need for forgiveness also speaks to us who angrily challenge those with wealth and power. Instead of looking to punish them, we should challenge them by granting them an amnesty for past wrongs. And the point of doing so would be that it is preferable to win people over than to have to conquer them. This is especially true when the differences between us are smaller than we would guess. For it is in our attempts to conquer others, especially done for some righteous cause, that we give ourselves permission to practice evil of which we claimed to be incapable. All of that is what we've seen in revolutions past.

Yes, we need to work for social justice. But we need to do so as fellow sinners, not as moral superiors, to those whom we are protesting. Otherwise, we will overlook the sins from our past and excuse our present and future sins. 






Monday, May 5, 2014

ONIM For May 5, 2014

Christian News



World News



Pick(s) Of The Litter

Thursday, April 25, 2013

Why Christians Should Attend May Day Celebrations

First, what is May Day? The answer to this question proves American Exceptionalism. That is because to the rest of the world, May Day is Labor Day. It isn't in America. There is another related proof of American Exceptionalism. Most of the world sees the connection between labor and wealth. But in the land of the financial services, what is connected with wealth is the combination of gambling and remote ownership.

May Day is about human rights. May Day in NYC, for example, will be about the rights of workers and immigrants. It is about standing up for and protecting those who are being exploited by our current economic system. The American worker has taken a beating during the past couple of decades. Pay has either stagnated or gone down when adjusted for inflation and fewer workers from certain sectors have jobs. Many other jobs have been outsourced to underpaid foreign workers or machines. And this is all done in the name of maximizing profits. In the meantime, immigrant workers are often herded, abused, and then exploited. Not only are they threatened, so are their families back home if these workers do not cooperate with their handlers.

So why should Christians participate in an event that is both a protest against abuse and a celebration of how these victims contribute to our lives? The question should answer itself but it doesn't. It doesn't because something has gone awry with American Conservative Christianity. That something can be found in the question of whether this religion is more conservative American than Christian.

To its believers, there is hardly a difference. American conservatives are all about the individual and morals. And since these Christians believe that their country was founded on the Bible and their faith, they believe that as American conservatism goes, so goes their Christianity.

What does their Christianity consist of? It consists of everything for the individual. One's personal faith brings one's own salvation. Once one is saved, one attempts to live on a fantasy island, an island where one believes that one can be protected from the world, with other likeminded Christians. Thus, those living on this island can ignore the collapsing world around them because their future is set. And the only way to really help people is to prepare them for what happens after the world collapses, that is get them to become citizens of their island. After all, nothing else matters but eternity.

But some such Christians still want to help others with the things of this world. They become a testimony to American Conservative Christianity. These Christians believed that individuals could help but that nobody should be compelled to. And this last point shows the influence of American conservatism on Christianity.

This emphasis on the individual has a strong effect on whom Christians will associate with. The first group they will associate with are fellow island dwellers, fellow Christians, for what they have in common is what is most important: eternity. The second group these Christians will hang with are those who share American conservative societal values. These people, some of whom are not Christians, are the real Americans while the rest of us are deemed as American wannabes. These people are ones with conservative political and social values. Finally, American Conservative Christians love to be with real patriots. A real patriot is one who regards America as the best country God has placed on this earth. So what the American Conservative Christian has in common with the patriot is this love of country, or could we call it tribalism, that needs to taken back before it is destroyed by strangers.

In addition to the above, American Conservative Christians have an aversion to challenging the law or speaking out in public. Such is looked down upon as a lack of faith in God and respect for the authorities God has placed over us.

So with all of these natural obstacles, why should Conservative Christians attend May Day? Perhaps the Bible says it best when Jesus says that even "the heathen love their own" in Matthew 22:36-40? See, May Day provides a Biblical opportunity to the American Conservative Christian of following Jesus's commands to love others.  Instead of supporting those one is comfortable with,  here is a chance to be with those who are different. On May Day, Christians can stand with those who are exploited or discarded by their employers and with immigrants who merely want to live like the rest of us. And since many of those attending these May Day celebrations throughout the country are in groups outside the American Conservative Christian's normal circle of friends, here is the chance for Conservative Christians throughout the land to do what Jesus commands.

The question becomes will American Conservative Christians seek to be with and care for those who are different? Will such Christians show the courage, the Bible looks on cowardice rather negatively, to stand with some of the victims of our economy and society? The excuses not to go will be as plentiful as they are convenient. Excuses like: there are other ways to care for workers such as prayer or one is too busy on May 1. But the real reason why many such Christians will not attend May Day celebrations is an all controlling fear. They are afraid to leave the safety and comfort of their fantasy islands. They are afraid to be with those who are too different and they are afraid to speak out against wealth and power. They will be afraid to be different. They will feel robbed of a chance to enjoy the spoils. And the irony here is that people who present themselves as the readers, lovers, and defenders of God's Word will not give a real Biblical reason why they refuse to attend May Day celebrations or hold their own holidays where they celebrate and defend those who are not their own.

Below are links to some of the May Day celebrations throughout the U.S.

May Day in Boston

May Day in NYC

May Day in Philly

May Day in Baltimore

May Day in Washington, D.C.

May Day in Atlanta

May Day in Pittsburgh

May Day in Chicago

May Day in LA