Is Socialism OK with Mormons now?


WhatMeWorry
 Share

Recommended Posts

The stuff I don't like about socialism isn't "socialism" itself, but it's evil cousin COMMUNISM.

I don't want the government to tell me where to live, what to say, where to say it, to whom I can say it to, etc.

Having been a licensed financial advisor with certain securities licenses, I'm actually bound to some of those things "in an effort to protect the investing public."

Until you're in a situation where your freedom of speech is impaired, right to free assembly is impaired, etc., you just may not fully understand.

Yes, I made a CHOICE to attain those licenses... and it's was until I got DEEP into this that I realized what I got myself into. I'm currently in the process of giving up those licenses so I can do the work I'm capable of doing without all the beaureucratic mess that interferes with the good I can do for my clients.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 161
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

For me Communism and Capitalism are just different sides of teh same coin. In communism government overlords control business. In capitalism super-rich CEO overlords control businesses. The competing nature of capitalism eventually leads to a few sucessful business owner becoming increasingly rich. As they become increasingly rich they can buy more control over other businesses. As a result they become even more rich.

you are now paid what the GOVERNMENT thinks you're worth for your services. You now have a permanent ceiling on your income.

In capitalism I am paid what my boss thinks I'm worth. Either way it's just another "overlord" determining what my work is worth.

unfortunately society cannot function on any large scale without tax. without taxes there is no millitary without millitary your land cannot be fortified like foretold in nephi, without health the nation loses strength also.

I don't recall Nephi declaring there be a tax. How did then the US government function and prosper during it's early years without an income tax? Taxes are the government's excuse to control its people.

Freedom is democracy, not the policies that that democracy impliments.

Freedom is not democracy. Democracy is mob rule where 51% of the population decide what rights the other 49% of the population get. Democracy is just as evil as tyranny.

BTW, Tithing isn't a tax. Tithing is a way we show our obedience to Heavenly Father through sacrifice. God doesn't need my money, He needs my faith.

Edited by deseretgov
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am in the UK where the definition of socialism is very different - and most LDS I know would be left wing loonies by American standards.

I appreciate the influence of socialism on my country, many men who fought and lost their lives in WW2 did it because they believed the world would become better and more caring, I don't know one that would have gone back to life before the NHS, etc I know I wouldn't. My life is greatly enriched because of socialism and accompanied by the freedom of demcracy in my experience gave me a great deal of freedom growing up, there was no doubt I would go to university even with poor circumstances, I had access to good education, good health, food and shelter when I needed it. My husband has friends that didn't have that, have had to take cut in wages to get better health insurance meaning they couldn't buy their house etc.

The companies we have that came about when industries were denationalised now have not got the same care for the customer attitude, and their call centres are generally in India so when you phone up you get no service as the person on the other end of the phone has no power to make a decision and often complains about my standard of English (I speak mostly RP like the Queen nowt wrong with it)

So for this UK Mormon a certain level of socialism far from being wrong is freeing, and caring and nowt wrong with it lol - when its done in the context of democratic society with a freedom of the press and judiciary - a totalitarian state whether it be right or left wing is wrong. But I see nothing wrong with my tax money being spent on making society work for everyone, if everyone pays higher taxes the economy adjusts to it anyway and it isn't noticed, we never get it so it was never ours kind of like Tithing in that respect I never notice that go. Captalism misused is just as wrong - if you want to tell me what America has been practicising with the world for the past 50 years has been totally fair trade capatalism then year I will go with you thats the best, but as I do not believe an uncorrupt govenrment is possible they may as well be working to make the lives of the people who pay their wages better

-Charley

Edited by Elgama
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a lifelong Mormon and I for one stand firmly with the statements of Ezra Taft Benson, Marion G. Romney, David O. McKay, Brigham Young, and all the others who spoke out against government programs that destroy liberty and rob people. Yes, we are probably now in the minority, but that is changing. There are many around us waking up every day.

Many pay lip-service to the seperation of church and state, indeed it is a good thing. What I believe in also is the seperation of economics and state. Laissez-faire capitalism not only is the most moral system, but it will also produce the most wealthy society possible.

The problem with democratic state compulsary socialism: it is based on a theory that just because a majority believes it is OK to rob a minority, the robbery is justified. It is therefore not only immoral, but it also decreases the overall wealth in society by taking wealth from productive economic entities to subsidize wealth destruction.

-a-train

Edited by a-train
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me Communism and Capitalism are just different sides of teh same coin. In communism government overlords control business. In capitalism super-rich CEO overlords control businesses. The competing nature of capitalism eventually leads to a few sucessful business owner becoming increasingly rich. As they become increasingly rich they can buy more control over other businesses. As a result they become even more rich.

If indeed the "super-rich CEO overlords" control business and wages, then the system is not capitalist.

In capitalism I am paid what my boss thinks I'm worth. Either way it's just another "overlord" determining what my work is worth.

If the system you are describing uses force to make a man work on terms he is not agreeable to, it is not capitalism.

Capitalism is explicitly defined as a system wherein the means of production are privately owned and controlled. If you are not in control of your means of production (your land, labor, capital, or natural resources), then you are not in a capitalist system. It matters not whether the culprit of compulsion is government or street thugs, where property rights are abridged capitalism is supplanted also. Government's proper role is to defend individual natural rights, including property rights. Where property rights are upheld, there is capitalism.

-a-train

Edited by a-train
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I titled this question that way partly to get attention but partly because I really want to get my fellow Saint's opinions on this issue. I know our Prophets used to speak openly about the dangers and evils of Socialism at one time (particularly President Benson when he was the Secy. of Agriculture and President McKay when Soviet Communism was at it's peak) but it seems that now we are a worldwide church we have gone pretty quiet on the issue.

Here's what I am getting at.

I went to the Salt Lake Tea Party on April 15 and I was a bit surprised to find that as an active Latter Day Saint, I was in the minority. Most of the people I talked to at the event and since were not LDS. So, I got curious and started asking around and I have been surprised to find that most of the members of my ward that I asked (in Salt Lake County) have no compelling concern about the current direction America is heading and several said they actually agree with the government take over of the banks, health care, the auto industry, etc. because "corporate greed has gotten so bad."

I also get a very common response from many LDS family and friends that they have given up entirely, there is no hope for America and that they are just waiting for end to come.

None of these LDS Americans have any interest in protesting or even calling public officials or participating in the political process at all other than to vote.

Needless to say, I am troubled.

I want to know how prevalent these ambivalent views on socialism are among other LDS people. Any comments?

First, I had to laugh at your avatar. It brings back old memory of my youth in reading MAD MAGAZINE. ^_^ Thanks for the humeral laugh of the day.

Second, not even close. Our form of government should ride on the principle of Theological form of government; it will be no different when the Savior returns. The church at this point can sustain itself on this very principle if our nation's government does fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In capitalism I am paid what my boss thinks I'm worth. Either way it's just another "overlord" determining what my work is worth.

Freedom is not democracy. Democracy is mob rule where 51% of the population decide what rights the other 49% of the population get. Democracy is just as evil as tyranny.

BTW, Tithing isn't a tax. Tithing is a way we show our obedience to Heavenly Father through sacrifice. God doesn't need my money, He needs my faith.

In capitalism... you can be your own boss. It's a choice to work for an employer or become one.

We don't have a democracy. We have a republic.

Republic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Democracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An Important Distinction: Democracy versus Republic

As far as Tithing... it isn't a compulsory tax ruled by the Government. It is a voluntary "tax" that the people of God choose to pay. (So, yes, I agree with you.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with the path that America is on and has been on for a long is that it creates a victimization mentality. It leads to despair and a belief that opportunities only exist for certain groups of people and that the only way to survive in such an unfair system is for the government to supplement and somehow "level" the playing field. This mind set leads to bondage and control by the very programs that were supposed to help. It creates generations of welfare families and forever increasing entitlement programs. Temporary assistance becomes lifelong support and ultimately a crutch that is never shed. Edited by bytor2112
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think those who have a problem with capitalism and claim it's a bunch of "overlord" CEO's running the show tend to forget how those overlords got there.

The beauty of capitalism, I think, is that it most accurately creates a society that reflects the godly principles of cause and effect. If a person works hard and applies himself/herself in the correct way, chances are said person will carve a very nice niche in his/her sphere of influence- including economically. Yes, there are plenty of big bad companies, but capitalism allows for the growth of new industry and companies that is under direct influence of the people who actually have the power to use innovation to further said industry. Even if a company never gets larger than 10 or so employees, a family can make a nice living off of the proceeds. Ideally, capitalism encourages ingenuity and innovation by its very nature: if the very best product is not being delivered to the people, then the company fails.

Personally, I think part of the shift from capitalism to socialism is the shift from family-centric thinking to government-centric thinking. Also, to keep a fair and godly society- where the poor are taken care of yet are still encouraged and given the tools to get themselves our of poverty- in a wholly non-socialized, capitalist economy takes much more effort, responsibility, and spiritual maturity from the people in general, because the government won't be there to hand out welfare. It requires public programs initiated by the people, for the people, and without government interference. That sort of empathy and maturity is conveyed and taught best by the sundry religions of the day- it's no wonder the founding fathers stressed the importance of religion and general morality so much.

In my opinion, socialism is a desperate response when the people of a nation have failed their God-given duty to not only look after themselves but others as well. Unfortunately, the corruption inherent in many of the religions of the day seems to fuel that response.

This has been "Maxel's :twocents: on socialism and capitalism"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wingnut, I have been reading some of the writings of the Prophets of the Church about Socialism. So are you saying that the concept's President Benson taught like below are not as valid today because the context of the world has changed?

No. I didn't say that the context of the world had changed. I said that the context in which President Benson's statements and comments were given needed to be taken into consideration. Not everything that a prophet ever says is automatically doctrine, especially that which is said prior to his becoming prophet.

Benson's statements on it were based largely on Cold-War era fears and propaganda.

Exactly.

Socialism reminds of the story called 'Animal Farm'.

I think it's supposed to be the other way around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a democratic socialist political outlook. I beleive in welfare (with strict qualifications, government shouldn't reward lazyness), healthcare etc etc but I still believe in free enterprise just that the higher earners should be taxed more for the social benefit of the less fortunate. The division of the rich and the poor is appauling, there are people out there working two jobs but cannot afford their rent, whilst others live a life of privelege without any effort or works of their own.

People should not have to live in fear of getting sick, they should not have to live in poor health, not when there is enough wealth in the world that there is no reason they need to. Its all about having charity for others, but instead everyone seems more concerned with their own material possession rather than the wellbeing of their fellow man. Us LDS don't question paying our tithing, but when we can do something that costs us far less that can benefit every poor family in the country the price is just too great.

Just don't forget the democracy part, thats where the problem lays. The problem isn't with public healthcare, rather with oppression and fascism.

I personally beleive an irrational fear of socialism is just remnants of cold war propaganda, glad we don't have that fear here in Aussieland. :)

The ideal is noble but in practice the system is not functional.

Nobody lives in fear of getting sick in America. We already have the largest social safety network and top medical care in the world. it is call Mediaid.

The issue is when 90% of the cost is shouldered b 10% of the people. The issue is when the government takes upon itself to become the ruler and master of the people bloating itself and loading the people with unfair taxes to support their vision of and ideological construct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I got curious and started asking around and I have been surprised to find that most of the members of my ward that I asked (in Salt Lake County) have no compelling concern about the current direction America is heading and several said they actually agree with the government take over of the banks, health care, the auto industry, etc. because "corporate greed has gotten so bad."

Well, if it's any comfort to you, out here in my part of "the mission field," most LDS seem to be against the things you mentioned. Of course, they pride themselves on being better Mormons that the Utah Mormons (rolling my eyes--they're full of it!).

I have heard no one talking about the government taking over the auto industry, just about giving it money so it doesn't go under. I have heard talk of the government temporarily taking over the banks they're bailing out, by buying the majority of stock, and then when the banks are back on their feet they can buy back the government's stock and be independent again. And as for health care, government interference might actually do some good. The private sector isn't exactly doing a great job in the U.S., and universal health care seems to work pretty well for various other countries. (Yes, I know I'll catch flak for saying so! :P)

I also get a very common response from many LDS family and friends that they have given up entirely, there is no hope for America and that they are just waiting for end to come.

I suspect this is true, that a lot of people are just giving up. It's really sad when people give up on the democratic process, isn't it?

None of these LDS Americans have any interest in protesting or even calling public officials or participating in the political process at all other than to vote.

Needless to say, I am troubled.

I think LDS people in general have never been very big on protesting, whatever the issue might be.

It is troubling to see people not participate. Even when I disagree with people, and even though I do agree with much that Obama is doing, it is sad when people just give up.

Peace.

HEP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think those who have a problem with capitalism and claim it's a bunch of "overlord" CEO's running the show tend to forget how those overlords got there.

The beauty of capitalism, I think, is that it most accurately creates a society that reflects the godly principles of cause and effect. I

trouble is greed tends to lead to those that climb the available ladder doing everything they can to pull it up behind them and stiffle true competition

-Charley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

trouble is greed tends to lead to those that climb the available ladder doing everything they can to pull it up behind them and stiffle true competition

-Charley

That's not greed. That's protecting your Intellectual Property rights.

If you don't put a "moat" around your castle, you deserve to have your best ideas infiltrated, pirated and destroyed by those who would do so.

Competition needs to be the outcome of ingenuity. Once true ingenuity is realized, NOW the competitiveness begins!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm....I should went ahead and design the first hand-held small size cellar phone [1982]. :) Perhaps, my design of a quad-core design CPU should of been preserved [1995] from the hands of xxxxxx. Or the smart sniper round [2000] that resembled a mini-tomahawk; taken by the Army. Or space plane/orbital platforms concept for a reactionary force by the Marines [2000], movement to any hot zone within 45-minutes, globally? :) There are others....

Have you seen the ToughBook by Panasonic? How do you think they achieved that milestone? :lol:

Edited by Hemidakota
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. I didn't say that the context of the world had changed. I said that the context in which President Benson's statements and comments were given needed to be taken into consideration. Not everything that a prophet ever says is automatically doctrine, especially that which is said prior to his becoming prophet.

However not only Benson, but others have said the same things.......and in general conference, therefor it would be doctrine.....just as Nephi, Daniel, Ezekiel and John spoke of similar things that would happen in our day. I don't think these guys words are any less applicable today, or need to be taken into consideration. So I believe Bensons words still stand!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However not only Benson, but others have said the same things.......and in general conference, therefor it would be doctrine.....just as Nephi, Daniel, Ezekiel and John spoke of similar things that would happen in our day. I don't think these guys words are any less applicable today, or need to be taken into consideration. So I believe Bensons words still stand!

What is "Official" LDS Doctrine?

Some of the highlights:

Brigham Young apparently understood this concept of cultural perspective when he revealed his belief that of all the many revelations God has given to the Church, there wasn’t “a single revelation” given “that is perfect in its fulness.”

Statements by leaders may be useful and true, but when they are “expressed outside the established, prophetic parameters,” they do “not represent the official doctrine or position of the Church.” This includes statements given in General Conference. Conference talks—while certainly beneficial for the spiritual edification of the Saints—generally focus on revealed, official truths. They do not—by nature of being given in Conference—expound “official” doctrine. As Harold B. Lee said, “It is not to be thought that every word spoken by the General Authorities is inspired, or that they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost in everything they write.” To claim that anything taught in general conference is “official” doctrine, notes J. F. McConkie, “makes the place where something is said rather than what is said the standard of truth. Nor is something doctrine simply because it was said by someone who holds a particular office or position. Truth is not an office or a position to which one is ordained.”

Harold B. Lee expressed similar thoughts when he taught that any doctrine, advanced by anyone—regardless of position—that was not supported by the standard works, then “you may know that his statement is merely his private opinion.” He recognized that the Prophet could bring forth new doctrine, but “when he does, [he] will declare it as revelation from God,” after which it will be sustained by the body of Church.

The Prophet can add to the scriptures, but such new additions are presented by the First Presidency to the body of the Church and are accepted by common consent (by sustaining vote) as binding doctrine of the Church (See D&C 26:2; 107:27-31). Until such doctrines or opinions are sustained by vote in conference, however, they are “neither binding nor the official doctrine of the Church.”

You can go ahead and check the references in the document.

Last I knew there was nothing in the Standard Works to indicate that capitalism has divine favor over socialism, nor do the standard works describe communism as the creation of Satan. It is quite reasonable to assign these interpretations as the opinion of a very politically biased man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am apalled at the direction the government is taking. There are much better solutions than having the government take over businesses.

But the problem with the government is not the government. It's us. We are simply sitting around and letting them rob us of our freedoms and future.

And you werent appaled with the last 8 years? lets see where we are in 4 years and then remember where we came from. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wingnut, I do admire President Lee but I do not sustain the Songs of Salomon since it is not doctrinal and yes, I know it part of a collection of canonized works. As with Paul letters or any other letters that was written . We accept it today based on canonization and faith what is contain is correct. For me, it is not acceptable unless I receive assurance from the Holy Ghost. Even a Prophet, exception of Kimball and Monson, I had to pray in receiving a conformation they were truly called.

Not to forget, if this is only doctrine to be concern with, the standard works, we should be concerned. I would be the first to stand up and make an apology to Joseph Smith and further back to Adam; who had additional doctrine or revelation that were not published for one reason or another. :)

We are entering a period of great children [phrasing President McKay - The Royal Generation], whom are the morning stars of heaven, who will take the scriptures and add to them via the Holy Ghost while educating the masses of today and tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wing Nut and Godless, The address I reprinted in full above that no one read was made by President Benson in his capacity as a Prophet of God, speaking to a group of Latter Day Saints after the Cold War had essentially ended. The Prophet Benson and all subsequent Prophets have made statements I believe about the importance of limited government with a backdrop that did not include a cold war. I think, in the latter day Prophet's perspective it is pretty clear that they view the very limited enumerated powers of the Constitution as an inspired thing... So the question is why are so many Latter Day Saints now partial to going against that council now?

Is it OK to disregard the Prophet's council in this area like we do elements of the word of wisdom because dependency on government is just a minor discretion?

The Belgians only pay 65% and the Swedish people do fine and they only pay what 60% and the Brittish will now only pay what 50%.... whatever the numbers are... we can ignor the council of President Benson because these other governments seem to do "OK" Do they really do "OK"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, I don't want a wreck. I want PEACE OF MIND. Yes, you have paid into "the system" for your fire brigade. Don't you feel better knowing that "it's there"? That IF there's going to be a fire at your home that there's a chance that your home can be saved?

The same peace of mind I have knowing that if I get sick tomorrow I can walk into a doctors and get treated without fear that my unavoidable illness will incur a mass of debt, or that if I get a chronic illness that may last for 6 months that causes me to lose my job and leaves me with expensive medical bills that I wont lose my home because of I'm dumped with an mountain of debt I have no means to pay for?

Renting is just like owning... except for someone else.

Renting is A CHOICE. Most of the time the ONLY choice. Renters may pay a homeowners association dues... but they don't have to live in a home where there are HOA dues. They can live somewhere else.

Renting isn't like owning, increased property value is a negative thing for someone renting as it only means higher rent, so why should a renter's taxes go towards parks and open spaces which will only increase their monthly outgoings on rent with no return on that payment?

Let me get a little shameless here: How about 9/11? I'm very proud of our NYFD men in blue to help people when they need help. I don't mind paying into a system to have a band of trained hero's to be there for our society. I don't mind having my kids look up at the firetruck and be excited about people who do great things and risk their own lives to do it.

Its very good that you appreciate such great people for such heroics, but it has no relevance to this argument. It's they kind of emotional sidestep politicians use to brainwash people with guilt that if you support A then you support B when in reality you do not support B.

The military protects us against our enemies. The fire department helps to protect our property from the elements.

Both serve as protection for us all. I'll take it!

So shouldn't they be privatised so that these heroes have an oppurtunity to earn more money? Also, do you not consider a doctor to be a hero when he saves countless lives in his career?

This point is really making your argument confusing to me, you hold firefighters and millitary in higher regard than doctors but you would prefer firefighters and millitary to earn less money in a socialist system whilst the doctors reap the benefits of working in a privatised system. From a logical perspective this really makes no sense. Your willing to pay a % of your income for firefighters and millitary but instead of paying that small % to doctors you're willing to pay double or triple when you're sick?

The stuff I don't like about socialism isn't "socialism" itself, but it's evil cousin COMMUNISM.

I don't want the government to tell me where to live, what to say, where to say it, to whom I can say it to, etc.

Thats just irrational fear, you live in a democratic country. Just because people vote for socialised healthcare doesnt mean they'll vote for a totalitarian system of government.

Edited by gaspah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share