If you have never read the Communist Manifesto the following is taken right from the book written by “Karl Marx” (pen name). His real name is Mordecai Levi:
“These measures will of course be different in different countries.
Nevertheless in the most advanced countries the following will be pretty generally applicable:
When, in the course of development, class distinctions have disappeared, and all production has been concentrated in the hands of a vast association of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organized power of one class for suppressing another. If the proletariat during its contest with the bourgeoisie is compelled, by the force of circumstances, to organize itself as a class, if, by means of a revolution, it makes itself the ruling class, and, as such, sweeps away by force the old conditions of production, then it will, along with these conditions, have swept away the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms, and of classes generally, and will thereby have abolished its own supremacy as a class.
In place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association, in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.”
In the preface of the book “KARL MARX the communist manifesto”, on page 53, we quote:
“There are, besides, eternal truths, such as Freedom, Justice, etc., that are common to all states of society. But Communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality, instead of constituting them on a new basis; it therefore acts in contradiction to all past historical experience.”
NOTES FROM TBA:
PLEASE RE-READ THE ABOVE PLANKS IN THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO VERY CAREFULLY. MOST, IF NOT ALL OF THESE PLANKS, HAVE ALREADY BEEN PUT IN PLACE.
COMMUNISM IS NOT AND CAN NEVER BE TRUE FREEDOM. COMMUNISM IS SLAVERY. IN ORDER TO OBTAIN WHAT THEY WANT TO ACHIEVE, COMMUNISTS MUST TAKE AWAY (BY FORCE IF NECESSARY) FROM WHAT OTHERS HAVE WORKED TO ACHIEVE. CONSIDER WHAT HAS BEEN, AND IS STILL, TRANSPIRING ON THE WEST COAST OF OUR COUNTRY.
THEY SIMPLY WANT TO TRADE PLACES WITH THE EXISTING SYSTEM WHICH WAS DRAFTED BY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS FOR A TRULY FREE SOCIETY.
IF WE LET THEM DO AWAY WITH THE CONSTITUTION OF THE united States of America, WHICH THEY ARE PRESENTLY IN THE PROCESS OF, OUR EXISTANCE AS A FREE NATION, UNDER OUR HEAVENLY FATHER YAHUWAH, WILL CEASE TO EXIST.
IT IS TIME TO TURN BACK AMERICA! STAND UP FOR TRUTH, JUSTICE AND FREEDOM FOR ALL!
THE FOLLOWING LIST OF ARTICLES SHOULD HELP US TO UNDERSTAND WHY OUR DESIRE TO SERVE OUR HEAVENLY FATHER AND SOCIALISM/COMMUNISM CANNOT COEXIST:
Excerpt From:
Author: King, Martin Luther, Jr.
Date: September 30, 1962
Location: Atlanta, Ga.
Genre: Sermon
Topic: Martin Luther King, Jr. - Career in Ministry
Martin Luther King, Jr. - Political and Social Views
“Can a Christian Be a Communist?”
Now, there are at least three reasons why I feel obligated as a Christian minister to talk to you about communism. The first reason grows out of the fact that communism is having widespread influence in the contemporary world. Like a mighty tidal wave, it has moved through China, Russia, eastern Europe, and now has rolled within ninety miles of the borders of our nation.2 More than a billion of the peoples of the world believe in communism. And many of these people have accepted it as a new religion, and they are willing to surrender their total being to this system. A force so potent cannot be ignored.
A second reason that I feel compelled to talk about communism this morning is that it is the only serious rival of Christianity.3 The other historic and great religions of the world such as Judaism, Mohammedanism, Buddhism, and Hinduism may stand as alternatives to Christianity. But for the most formidable competitor that Christianity faces in the world today, we must look to communism. No one conversant with the hard facts of modern life can deny the truth that communism is Christianity's most serious rival.
The third reason that I feel compelled to talk about communism this morning is that it is unfair and certainly unscientific to condemn a system of thought without knowing what that system of thought says and without knowing why it is wrong and why it is evil. So, for these reasons, I choose to talk about this troubling issue.
Now, let us begin by answering the question which our sermon topic raises: Can a Christian be a communist? I answer that question with an emphatic “no.” These two philosophies are diametrically opposed. The basic philosophy of Christianity is unalterably opposed to the basic philosophy of communism, and all of the dialectics of the logician cannot make them lie down together. They are contrary philosophies.
How, then, is communism irreconcilable with Christianity? In the first place, it leaves out God and Jesus Christ. Communism is avowedly secularistic and materialist.4 The great philosopher of communism, Karl Marx, based his total philosophy on what he called dialectical materialism. There was a philosopher by the name of [George Wilhelm Friedrich] Hegel who had used what he called the dialectical system to analyze concepts, and Karl Marx was willing to take Hegel’s dialectic. And then he studied another man by the name of Feuerbach, a German philosopher.5 This man was a materialist. And so he took the materialism of this man and added it to the dialectic that he got from Hegel, and this is why his system is called dialectical materialism.
Now, what is materialism? It says in substance that the whole of reality can be explained in terms of matter in motion. In other words, it says that the basic stuff of reality is the material stuff. Materialism says, in substance, that idealism is wrong when it talks about the ultimate reality of mind and spirit and all of that. Karl Marx was a materialist, and he believed that the whole of human history moved on, driven by economic forces. This was his idea. There was no place in that system for God, and so from that moment on, communism became an atheistic system. And to this very day it is atheistic. It denies the existence of God. And if one goes to Russia, even today, he will find many of the churches fill on Sunday morning, but we know that in spite of that, the Russian government has had a campaign against religion, and against God and belief in God, ever since the revolution in 1917.
So that no Christian can be a communist because communism leaves out God. It regards religion psychologically as wishful thinking, regards religion intellectually as the product of fear and ignorance. And it regards religion historically as an instrument serving the ends of exploiters. This is what communism teaches about religion. And so, in a real sense, we disagree with this because we believe that history is moved not by economic forces but by spiritual forces [Congregation:] (Amen, Yeah) We believe that there is a God (Pray on) in this universe (Yes sir, Yes), a God who loves his children, and a God who works through history for the salvation of man. (Pray on) Consequently, we can’t accept communism at that point.
A second reason that we can’t accept communism is that its methods are opposed to Christianity. (Pray on) Since for the communist there is no divine government or no absolute moral order, there are no fixed, immutable principles. So force, violence, murder, and lying are all justifiable means to bring about the millennial end. Lenin, the man who was something of the technician of communism, putting the philosophy of Karl Marx into practical action, said on one occasion, “We must be ready to employ trickery, deceit, and lawbreaking, withholding and concealing truth.”6 That the followers of Lenin have been willing to act upon these instructions is a matter of history. For communism the end justifies the means.
There again we can’t go along with this. We believe that there are certain moral principles in this universe that are eternal and absolute. We believe that there are some things right and there are some things wrong. It’s wrong to lie. It always has been wrong, and it always will be wrong. It’s wrong to hate. (Yes sir) It always has been wrong, and it always will be wrong. It’s wrong to throw away the precious lives that God has given us in riotous living. It was wrong in 1800 B.C., and it’s wrong in 1962 A.D. It’s wrong in Russia. It’s wrong in China. It’s wrong in India. It’s wrong in New York. It’s wrong in Atlanta. (Yeah) We believe that there are some things right, eternally and absolutely so, and there are some things wrong. Then we don’t believe that the end justifies the means if those means happen to be bad. For we know that the end represents the means in process and the ideal in the making. The end is preexistent in the means. And so destructive means cannot bring about constructive ends. Immoral methods cannot achieve moral goals. And so we disagree with the ethical relativism of communism.
In the third place, we have to disagree with communism because the end of communism is the state. I should qualify this by saying that the state in communist theory is a temporary reality, an interim reality, which is to be eliminated when the classless society emerges. (Yeah, yeah) Karl Marx talks of that day when there will be a classless society. The ruling class, or rather the workers, what he called the proletariat, will through the revolution take power from the ruling class, which were the producers or the capitalists. And finally they will come to power, and through their power, they will establish a classless society. He says that while you are on the way to this classless society the state is the end. Man becomes only a means to that end. And if any man’s so-called rights or liberties stand in the way of that end, they are simply swept aside. And so in the communistic system, you do not have freedom of the press. You do not have freedom of speech. You do not have freedom of assembly. All of these things are under the scrutiny of the state, which is manipulated through the party. And whatever the Party says, that must be done. All of the freedoms that are dear to us are denied. Man has to be a servant, a dutiful and submissive servant of the state. The state is omnipotent and supreme, and so if one lived in Russia today, he couldn’t just get up and make a speech against the Communist Party. (Right) If one lived in Russia today, he could not write a book saying certain things without the condemnation of the Party; he may be searched and even killed. (Yeah) You remember the great book that Pasternak wrote, and you remember the problems that he faced because there were within that book some things that they didn’t like in Russia.7 It had some criticisms of the system.
We know that the most creative moments in history are those moments when individuals are left free to think. The thing that makes man man is his freedom. This is why I could never agree with communism as a philosophical system because it deprives man of freedom. And if a man is not free, he is not fully man. If a man does not have the capacity to deliberate, to decide, and to respond, as Paul Tillich would say, he is not a man, for a man is man because he is free. And, therefore, communism is on the wrong road because it denies freedom.
And so for these three reasons, I am convinced that no Christian can be a communist. These two systems are opposed to each other. These two systems are contradictory. We must try to
understand communism. We must love communists. But never can we accept communism and be true Christians.
N.I. Bukharin and E. Preobrazhensky: The ABC of Communism
§ 89. Why religion and communism are incompatible
'Religion is the opium of the people,' said Karl Marx. It is the task of the Communist Party to make this truth comprehensible to the widest possible circles of the labouring masses. It is the task of the party to impress firmly upon the minds of the workers, even upon the most backward, that religion has been in the past and still is today one of the most powerful means at the disposal of the oppressors for the maintenance of inequality, exploitation, and slavish obedience on the part of the toilers.
Many weak-kneed communists reason as follows: 'Religion does not prevent my being a communist. I believe both in God and in communism. My faith in God does not hinder me from fighting for the cause of the proletarian revolution.'
This train of thought is radically false. Religion and communism are incompatible, both theoretically and practically.
Every communist must regard social phenomena (the relationships between human beings, revolutions, wars, etc.) as processes which occur in accordance with definite laws. The laws of social development have been fully established by scientific communism on the basis of the theory of historical materialism which we owe to our great teachers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. This theory explains that social development is not brought about by any kind of supernatural forces. Nay more. The same theory has demonstrated that the very idea of God and of supernatural powers arises at a definite stage in human history, and at another definite stage begins to disappear as a childish notion which finds no confirmation in practical life and in the struggle between man and nature. But it is profitable to the predatory class to maintain the ignorance of the people and to maintain the people's childish belief in miracles (the key to the riddle really lies in the exploiters' pockets), and this is why religious prejudices are so tenacious, and why they confuse the minds even of persons who are in other respects able.
The general happenings throughout nature are, moreover, in no wise dependent upon supernatural causes. Man has been extremely successful in the struggle with nature. He influences nature in his own interests, and controls natural forces, achieving these conquests, not thanks to his faith in God and in divine assistance, but in spite of this faith. He achieves his conquests thanks to the fact that in practical life and in all serious matters he invariably conducts himself as an atheist. Scientific communism, in its judgements concerning natural phenomena, is guided by the data of the natural sciences, which are in irreconcilable conflict with all religious imaginings.
In practice, no less than in theory, communism is incompatible with religious faith. The tactic of the Communist Party prescribes for the members of the party definite lines of conduct. The moral code of every religion in like manner prescribes for the faithful some definite line of conduct. For example, the Christian code runs: 'Whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.' In most cases there is an irreconcilable conflict between the principles of communist tactics and the commandments of religion. A communist who rejects the commandments of religion and acts in accordance with the directions of the party, ceases to be one of the faithful. On the other hand, one who, while calling himself a communist, continues to cling to his religious faith, one who in the name of religious commandments infringes the prescriptions of the party, ceases thereby to be a communist.
The struggle with religion has two sides, and every communist must distinguish clearly between them. On the one hand we have the struggle with the church, as a special organization existing for religious propaganda, materially interested in the maintenance of popular ignorance and religious enslavement. On the other hand we have the struggle with the widely diffused and deeply ingrained prejudices of the majority of the working population.
Communist Manifesto: A Christian Response
In 1975, Communist China could not feed its own people. They were starving and needed to import food to feed their people. The leaders decided to change something and within one decade something radical happened….but what was it?
Communist Worldview
Communism and Socialism both spurn from a humanistic worldview. Humanism, according to Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer, can be characterized by man being the center and measure of all things. Where there is no revelation from God, humans are elevated to a “god-like” status. Humanism also emphasizes the subjective nature of our belief system. Where everyone is right about everything, everything is subjective. Where there is a right and wrong despite what anyone thinks is objective in nature. Humanists believe that laws are subjective. This creates laws that are arbitrary, anti-god, and anti-religious. In a humanist mentality, what a worldview boils down to is what a person thinks is good and would create happiness. It is subjective instead of objective. It is not based on God (objective) but man (subjective). This is what Hitler, Stalin, and Mao Tse-tung believed. This is what Karl Marx believed when he wrote his Communist Manifesto.
Communism’s Manifesto
The Communist Manifesto was written in 1848 declaring to the world what the communist party believed. Communism comes from the Latin word communis which means, “shared, common, or universal.” It is the concept that there is no private property, but shared. Originally, Marx saw the terms socialism and communism as interchangeable and synonymous.
In the beginning of the book, Marx and Engels write that, “The history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggles.” They argue that there are always two different classes of society which are always against each other. They name these two different classes as the proletariat (blue collar workers) and the bourgeoisie (land owners). They say, “Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another.” Although we don’t have many surfs and lords now a days, Marx will say that new forms of the “struggle” will morph with time and come to the surface in different ways.
Marxism
There are typically three views of Marxism:
Looking at the Communist Manifesto from a Christian perspective, we see some of the main tenets of Marx revolve around personal property. He believed that personal property should be abolished. He believed that the extent to which it should be taken was sharing wives in common. Marx also believed that children’s education was the responsibility of the collective community to further the teachings of a Marxist mentality.
Biblical Worldview
When looking at these tenets briefly from a Biblical perspective, we see that God is not against the owning of personal property. The Ten Commandments state this clearly in the commands to not steal or to not covet a neighbor’s possession (or spouse). We also see that it is the parents responsibility for teaching their children (Deut. 6, Eph 6).
What Marxism brings as well to the table of worldviews is economics. Again, Marxism believes there is no personal property. Everyone works for the same wage. There is no incentive and no free market economy. We as Christians are called to help the poor and oppressed. The main question is, “How?” What economic system should be in place to better help the poor? The Liberation Theologians will claim a form of neo-Marxism will be the best system to help the poor.
Christianity’s Response
From a Christian perspective, Marxism has shown up in our Christian circles under the guise of “liberation theology.” Liberation theology was set up to fight poverty and oppression via neo-Marxism. Tony Campollo, a face of liberation theology, wrote a book titled, We Have Met the Enemy and They are Partly Right. In this book, he laid out basic tenants of neo-Marxism and encouraged his readers to share in his sentiments in this way to help fight oppression and poverty. But, here is the problem: Poverty doesn’t create wickedness. Wickedness creates poverty.
We look at the United States today with all the socialist governmental programs set in place to help the poor and we see failure. We see more and more people are not given any incentive to work. Why work when the government gives you money? Why work when the government penalizes you for making money? We should not help the poor the way we are helping them now. We are enhancing their poverty by all the social systems set into place. Look what happened in China. The government of China gave their people capitalist incentives to produce food and keep profit for themselves. They gave them a taste of a free market with incentives. Within one decade, instead of China needing to import food, they could feed themselves AND export their food! One decade of turn around based off of incentive and a taste of freedom. The poor in the United States today have no incentive to work.
A controlled economy is not the answer, according to Dr. Ronald Nash. What the poor need is a capitalist economy. They need incentive and a free market. Liberation theology aligns with socialism. Liberation theologians will try to help the poor by fostering and encouraging socialist frameworks but the long term effects do more harm than good to the poor. The older forms of Marxism have fallen by the wayside and have failed. The only Marxist-Leninist governments in existence today are: North Korea, Cuba, and China: And look at their “success.”
For God’s Glory
As we see from above, Marx, in his book The Communist Manifesto, espoused many unbiblical views of personal property. The Bible does not teach a compulsory system in giving. We as Christians are to be giving generously to help those in need–especially those who are our brothers and sisters in Christ (Gal 6:10). Economics is something we as Christians should pay attention to. We will be held accountable for our actions and for what words we espouse. We need to do our best to be biblical in our thinking about what would honor, obey, and glorify God–for, to Him be the glory.
For Further Discussion:
Economic Oppression vs. Economic Freedom on: The Reformed Conservative
Social Welfare Programs and Christians on: The Reformed Conservative
~
The Reformed Conservative aims to reunite gentlemanly virtues with scholarly conversation. Standing in the great Reformed and conservative heritage of thinkers like Edmund Burke and Abraham Kuyper, we humbly seek to inject civility into an informed conversation, one article at a time, bringing clarity out of chaos.
https://thereformedconservative.org/liberals-conservatives-cant-just-get-along/
Cicero on:
Why Liberals and Conservatives Can’t
Just Get Along
Do you ever wonder if the “COEXIST” bumper sticker might be just a bit unrealistic? Whether you are conservative or liberal, deep down we know it is impossible for everyone to get along and “coexist.” In the same vein, it is impossible for liberals and conservatives to be good friends. Friendship is strained to the breaking point due to a deep worldview divide.
The ancient philosopher Cicero explains that virtue and piety are the foundations for friendship. It is because of virtue that friendships are initiated and maintained. Virtue in one person gravitates towards the virtue of another. It acts like a magnet. It works like this because people who are like minded tend to want to be around other likeminded individuals. However, when people have different virtues, values, and morals, it is not possible for a good friendship to be maintained. It goes against the very definition of friendship. Cicero declares a friendship to be a relationship in which there is “a complete accord on all subjects human and divine joined with mutual goodwill and affection of the things of this world.”
This common bumper sticker is a “Coexist fallacy” and is fanciful thinking at best. Muslims want Sharia Law, Christians don’t want abortion, Mormons don’t want homosexuality, and activists want human rights extended to animals. There will always be a war, overt or covert, on a given subject between those of different worldviews. Within these deep and lasting friendships, there must be this plain talk that is open and genuine. Personally, I have lost a dear friend due to this worldview divide. When once we had a common way of thinking about the world, now our conversations barely subsist on only a surface level. How could we talk to each other in deep and meaningful ways when every other sentence spoken we disagreed with? A conversation full of nothing but disagreement on passionate subjects cannot sustain a friendship for long.
Cicero in his treatise On Friendship, says that deep friendships are for good and virtuous men. Along with this virtuous character is the “harmony of interests, purpose, and aims.” Being genuine is a noble virtue and a true friendship ought to have the freedom to let honesty be allowed without impatience or annoyance. If friendship is bound up in virtue, and liberals and conservatives can’t even agree on what is a good virtue, how can they have a deep friendship? Profound friendships can withstand the weight when one bears their heart and soul. These friendships will also have sound advice and encouragement following. People with differing worldviews are not interested in getting advice with those on the other side of the divide.
The idea of the difficulty to live with people of other values is not a new concept. Cicero’s good friend Scipio Africanus defined society as “not every assembly of the multitude, but an assembly united in fellowship by common agreement as to what is right and a community of interest.” Africanus holds a mirror to America, showing that our country is deeply divided. Liberals and conservatives do not agree to what is right and do not have a common community of of love. We are not united, but divided. Liberals, with their ideas and beliefs, find commonality with other liberals and conservatives do so likewise.
As Christians, is it important to pick our friends cautiously. Proverbs 12:26 says, “The righteous choose their friends carefully, but the way of the wicked leads them astray.” We are exhorted in 1 Corinthians 15:33 to stay away from bad company for it corrupts good character. Conversely, we should be looking for those with good character and virtue for as “iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another” (Prov 27:17). By definition, a deep friendship is one where a common worldview is mutually accepted, and where there is a deep worldview divide, there cannot be a deep friendship. And as much as COEXIST folks would like there to be this mystical harmony between every human being, it simply isn’t possible. Shake the oil and vinegar dressing all you want, they but they don’t mix.
For Further Discussion:
Stanley Fish: Why We Can’t All Just Get Along
~
The Reformed Conservative aims to reunite gentlemanly virtues with scholarly conversation. Standing in the great Reformed and conservative heritage of thinkers like Edmund Burke and Abraham Kuyper, we humbly seek to inject civility into an informed conversation, one article at a time, bringing clarity out of chaos.
Intersting information on Communism:
https://www.galvnews.com/opinion/guest_columns/article_09a3a693-7a07-513a-ad1c-39d5518b1cf5.html