Can a Spiritual Person Become a Socialist?
Socialism as Bait
I have many friends who consider themselves spiritual who are now supporting socialism and socialist candidates. Until just recently, socialism was anathema and totally unacceptable. Has something changed? Some no longer consider me to be a friend, even though my views have not changed.
Enlightenment VS Socialism
This discussion is coming from the point of view of one on the path toward total enlightenment. So, the question becomes, is socialism enlightened? After all, it promises to treat everyone the same with no special interest groups as well as justice for all.
Justice?
My friends talk about economic and social justice and how it's unfair for some people to be rich and live in mansions while others are homeless and starving. If one takes from the rich and gives to the poor, isn’t that what Jesus, Buddha, and Mohammed talked about? Some think that socialism will mean better treatment for those who are different from us ethnically, economically, sexually or any other way. Others conflate socialism with social media. It is good to help others who need it. We should all be charitable, no matter our circumstance. Since our country is based on capitalism and some people are racist, some think it should be dismantled and replaced with a pure socialist regime, which they think is fairer and promotes equality in income and social programs and opportunities.
What I Personally Found Out About Socialism
Socialism is many things, from total communes to totalitarian regimes. It works well in a small group where all the individuals are on the same page spiritually and philosophically. Issues can be ironed out and decisions made easily, since there are only a few people involved. Dissent and lack of funds can be worked out. It is the “Three Musketeers” philosophy of “One for all and all for One.” We take care of each other equally, even if one contributes more than another and some cannot contribute at all. In other words, a “loving family.”
Can Governments be Charitable?
As a governmental policy for hundreds of millions of people, if not billions, it is much different. It has been tried with the Pilgrims in the Plymouth Colony, in New England, Russia, China, Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela, among others. These societies obviously went wrong somehow, leading to a rich ruling elite and widespread poverty among the general population. In addition, those who were not in support of the ruling elite were jailed, ‘reeducated,’ or killed as traitors. History is clear here. Governments are in the business of managing and organizing large masses of people. It is necessary for these people to be in alignment with both each other and their government. Those who violate the law must be dealt with, whatever the law is.
Are the Scandinavian Countries Good Socialist Role Models?
I have visited Denmark and it is not a socialist country. It is capitalist with a lot of money and a heart. The population of Denmark is about six million. Norway is smaller, yet, like Denmark, has a robust social safety net. Some common characteristics include a very cold northern climate, relatively homogeneous ethnic population, and very generous tax income from North Sea oil revenues and seaport taxes. If the population increased significantly, the benefits would have to decrease, as they try to match spending to income. Sweden and Finland recently had to do this when benefits became more generous than they could afford. Check it out.
The Rights of the Group VS Individual Rights
At the core, socialism is the philosophy that the needs of the whole outweigh those of individuals. Individuals thus have no personal or private rights as their stuff can be taken at will in the name of the needs of the collective. It is not unlike Star Trek’s “The Borg” in many ways. It sounds like “We are One” in spiritual philosophy. Similar, yes; the same, no.
In practice, as I have noted, socialism works better in small groups than large ones. Large groups or countries have too many people with too many ideas that conflict. All people think they are correct in their own way of thinking and it is normal to want others to think the way we do. It is the “right thing to do” in their opinion. Socialists think it is their job to “correct” wrong thinkers. This dissonance is common in large countries. Socialism seeks consensus, but has little tolerance for dissonance. It is the right of the group to squash out opposition by any means necessary, expelling them one way or another, small or large group. Historically, Marxist countries have killed many of their citizens.
In practice, as I have noted, socialism works better in small groups than large ones. Large groups or countries have too many people with too many ideas that conflict. All people think they are correct in their own way of thinking and it is normal to want others to think the way we do. It is the “right thing to do” in their opinion. Socialists think it is their job to “correct” wrong thinkers. This dissonance is common in large countries. Socialism seeks consensus, but has little tolerance for dissonance. It is the right of the group to squash out opposition by any means necessary, expelling them one way or another, small or large group. Historically, Marxist countries have killed many of their citizens.
Socialism = Equality = Justice
With socialism, it is OK to take from others who have earned “stuff” to give to others who do not have as much. It works if the receiver is grateful and the giver gives in a loving way. When it is perceived as “stolen” from them, it generates anger and bitterness. The equality of socialism often means a “leveling down,” which is needed to prevent hard workers from getting too much, in the name of social or economic justice. The government has to know what is going on and have the ability to make the changes needed, so individual rights and privacy are gone in the name of the rights of the group.
Of course, as with all societies in the history of mankind, any restrictions on the general population seldom apply to the ruling class bureaucrats, “nobility,” and rulers, whatever they are called. They usually exempt themselves from their own laws because they are “special” and nobody can make them. Promises of equality under the law made at the beginning of a socialist governments never seem to last very long, as circumstances arise that force desperate compromises when the money runs out.
Of course, as with all societies in the history of mankind, any restrictions on the general population seldom apply to the ruling class bureaucrats, “nobility,” and rulers, whatever they are called. They usually exempt themselves from their own laws because they are “special” and nobody can make them. Promises of equality under the law made at the beginning of a socialist governments never seem to last very long, as circumstances arise that force desperate compromises when the money runs out.
Who Supervises Those Who Make the Rules?
In other words, supporting socialism means more taxes since the money doesn’t belong to you, it belongs to the society as a whole. The ruling class will make the decisions on how to spend it. You will have no individual rights, per se, unless it benefits the collective… or the leaders. There will be few, if any, incentives to step out and do more than anyone else, as they will not be rewarded and often criticized as one trying to be better than others. Creativity is stifled and not rewarded for the same reasons. Spirituality and religion are often not tolerated because they foster “differences.” All of the above can be good, if all is done in LOVE. In republics governed by law, people who abuse the system can be thrown out; in socialist totalitarian system, the ‘beloved’ leader often consolidates power and cannot be thrown out or refuses to leave.
A Kibbutz in Israel: An Example of How Even a Small Socialist Group Works
Collectives were self-sufficient for a time in Israel. I once visited and stayed overnight at the Kibbutz Lavi near Golani Junction, Israel. We were offered a two-hour discussion of the history of the place after supper. The kibbutz, founded by “youngsters who were transported from Germany to England as part of the “Kindertransport” and were educated in the Brit ChalutzinDatiim (Bachad) movement” in 1949. At first, they were self-supporting, but now they depend heavily on a subsidy from the Israeli government and have to sell agricultural products and furniture as well as run the living quarters as a hotel.
People are allowed to leave the kibbutz and new people are allowed in, after a screening process. The original motivations of “freedom in a new land,” morphed to more modern and practical ones. It was indicated to us that one of the problems they have had is that members are not willing to do without and want more and more of the same things they see on TV or the internet. There are about 170 families with 250 children, according to Wikipedia. There were 273 kibbutzim in Israel in 2017; for more info, check here. This is as good as socialism gets. The large majority of Israeli’s are capitalist.
People are allowed to leave the kibbutz and new people are allowed in, after a screening process. The original motivations of “freedom in a new land,” morphed to more modern and practical ones. It was indicated to us that one of the problems they have had is that members are not willing to do without and want more and more of the same things they see on TV or the internet. There are about 170 families with 250 children, according to Wikipedia. There were 273 kibbutzim in Israel in 2017; for more info, check here. This is as good as socialism gets. The large majority of Israeli’s are capitalist.
Steal It or Earn it
There are two main ways to get stuff in this temporary physical world: earn it (by paying for it) or take it from somebody else who has what we want. Most of the ancient “hunter-gather” society were the “take it” kind. When society grew to where there wasn’t enough to gather from the earth or steal from others, we started to farm, to grow our own food. That meant building cities, shelters and storage for what we grew. It meant using creativity to produce more for more people, to trade with others for stuff we wanted but didn’t have, instead of stealing. We depended on each other, respecting differences in order to build and maintain relationships. We are social beings and depend on each other. One big difference in the various systems is how we get the things we need and want in life.
Capitalism is all about Encouraging Earning a Living
Capitalism is a direct outgrowth of how to deal with the needs of large groups of people. One must harness the ability of all people, not give them stuff they could get for themselves. Creativity, an innate divinely inspired ability is valued and rewarded. It gives incentives to individuals to benefit from their own hard work, providing food and stuff for others to buy. People’s skills, ingenious ideas, and labor are all valued and put to work. When all or most are working together, with the incentives of freedom, it is mostly a self-adjusting system. Because people are different and have different life experiences, results vary. Working hard to earn a living and saving for hard times is at the core of a system that encourages self-determination, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of speech and the right to pursue happiness.
Capitalism is Popular Even if It isn’t Perfect
Capitalism is the most popular because it is voluntary, the most creative and more people do better with it than socialism. Capitalism generally works to protect individuals, the customers of each other.
Spirituality is not only tolerated but thrives in a free market of goods and ideas. It frequently levels up the playing field, not down. People with money buy more stuff than those who do not have much money. People who have freedom of religion gradually become more enlightened faster than those deprived of open discussions of our Source, spending a lot of their time just making a living. Some criticize capitalism and the United States and other republics because they are ‘racist’ and had slaves at the beginning. Trouble is, the entire world is racist in some ways, even today: people like their own culture and are suspicious of others they do not understand, especially if some of those who are different try to take advantage of them. It doesn’t excuse racist feelings, but it doesn’t involve everyone and certainly isn’t unique to the United States.
The thing is, human nature is flawed. We think we are special and others are not. Too often we think it is OK to take stuff from other people, in part because we don’t like them. It is people, not the system that determines individual behavior. Any attempts to create a “heaven on earth” has to deal with human nature, those who will not go along.
Capitalism has the advantage of having a system of laws widely administered to hold back the excesses of individuals and cannot be changed unless the elected officials change them, a fairly involved process. Socialist systems can be changed on the whims of people like Maduro, Castro, Putin, Xi Jinping, or Kim Jong Un. There are no meaningful votes there.
Spirituality is not only tolerated but thrives in a free market of goods and ideas. It frequently levels up the playing field, not down. People with money buy more stuff than those who do not have much money. People who have freedom of religion gradually become more enlightened faster than those deprived of open discussions of our Source, spending a lot of their time just making a living. Some criticize capitalism and the United States and other republics because they are ‘racist’ and had slaves at the beginning. Trouble is, the entire world is racist in some ways, even today: people like their own culture and are suspicious of others they do not understand, especially if some of those who are different try to take advantage of them. It doesn’t excuse racist feelings, but it doesn’t involve everyone and certainly isn’t unique to the United States.
The thing is, human nature is flawed. We think we are special and others are not. Too often we think it is OK to take stuff from other people, in part because we don’t like them. It is people, not the system that determines individual behavior. Any attempts to create a “heaven on earth” has to deal with human nature, those who will not go along.
Capitalism has the advantage of having a system of laws widely administered to hold back the excesses of individuals and cannot be changed unless the elected officials change them, a fairly involved process. Socialist systems can be changed on the whims of people like Maduro, Castro, Putin, Xi Jinping, or Kim Jong Un. There are no meaningful votes there.
Socialism is a Sidetrack
The bottom line is that socialism doesn't work for large groups, such as cities or countries because there is not guranteed unity and buy-in that remains for all people to be treated the same way, even if they don't act the same way. Moral authority is absent from socialism. While it says all should be treated the same, it doesn't do so uniformly when opposition is encountered.
Spiritual growth is often sidetracked for a while because people have to spend more time dealing with survival and "unfair treatment" that often leads to them being punished by the socialist authorities. It shouldn't be that way, but usually is. Just look at how some modern parties have treated their opposition economically and politically.
The goal of being the 'loyal opposition' is gone for now. Former presidents and opposition candidates are being sued and arrested, putting them in jail. Not my idea of enlightenment.
Spiritual growth is often sidetracked for a while because people have to spend more time dealing with survival and "unfair treatment" that often leads to them being punished by the socialist authorities. It shouldn't be that way, but usually is. Just look at how some modern parties have treated their opposition economically and politically.
The goal of being the 'loyal opposition' is gone for now. Former presidents and opposition candidates are being sued and arrested, putting them in jail. Not my idea of enlightenment.