How The Dalai Lama Saw The True Nature Of Chinese Communism
Despite his spending a lifetime fighting Chinese oppression in Tibet, the Dalai Lama’s new book, Voice for the Voiceless, is a rich source of wisdom and optimism.Despite his spending a lifetime fighting Chinese oppression in Tibet, the Dalai Lama’s new book, Voice for the Voiceless, is a rich source of wisdom and optimism.How St. Joseph reveals the true meaning of work — and exposes the emptiness of socialist ideology
Many of us in the West are familiar with May Day, and most of us would say we are opposed to it.
When asked why, we might say that it promotes communism, or that the evil regime of the Soviet Union enforced its celebration. These arguments may be perfectly reasonable, but I do not believe they are sufficient.
'There could not be a better protector to help you to let the spirit of the gospel penetrate your life.'
To understand fully why Christians ought not to celebrate May Day, we should look at what the holiday is really about: the socialist understanding of work and the worker.
Challenging May Day
In response to the growth of socialist power and influence throughout the first half of the 20th century, the Catholic Church repeatedly pushed back against the ideology, especially under the leadership of Leo XIII (1878-1903), Pius XI (1922-1939), and Pius XII (1939-1958).
In 1955, as a direct challenge to May Day, Pius XII established May 1 as the feast of St. Joseph the Worker. It's through the figure of Joseph that the Church exposes the emptiness of the socialist idea of work.
“Cursed is the earth in thy work;” God tells Adam in Genesis 3. “With labor and toil shalt thou eat thereof all the days of thy life.”
Man will always need to "labor and toil." Any hope for a work-free, earthly utopia rests on the fundamental ignorance of this basic fact. To be human is to work; it is an essential and permanent aspect of any human society.
Meaningful work
The question then becomes: What is the purpose of our work? What makes it meaningful?
According to the socialists — best exemplified by the massive labor force of the Soviet Union — the purpose of work was simply the betterment of the state. The “rights of the worker" exist only to allow each individual to contribute to the good of the collective.
For Pius XI, this negation of man's true purpose was the fundamental problem of socialism. In his 1931 encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, he admits that while communism produces the the evils of unrelenting class warfare and the total abolition of private ownership, less extreme versions of socialism cannot be as broadly condemned.
'Utterly foreign to Christian truth'
This is because some of the concerns expressed by socialists are not unfounded. The central example Pius XI points to is Western capitalism's tendency to allow the market to seize “sovereignty over society."
In contending that such sovereignty belongs “not to owners, but to the public authority,” the pope emphasizes that socialism's opposition to Western capitalism is not in itself enough to dismiss it. Instead, he cuts to the real issue — that socialism's very "concept of society itself is utterly foreign to Christian truth.”
Man is placed on earth so that he might order his life “unto the praise and glory of his creator.” Man derives happiness in this life and the next from seeking to do what is pleasing to God.
Socialism, writes Pius XI, is “wholly ignoring and indifferent to this sublime end of man.” In the socialist view, human society exists “for the sake of material advantage alone.” We can clearly see how an ideology devoid of supernatural meaning cannot possibly possess a correct understanding of work and its purpose.
When Pius XII established the Feast of Saint Joseph the Worker, he showed why socialism and the socialist celebration of May Day are incompatible with the Christian understanding of work.
In speaking to workers' associations, he reminded them, “Your first concern is to preserve and increase the Christian life of the worker.” This prioritization of the divine is in direct conflict with the materialist worldview of socialism.
Capitalism's excesses
Like his predecessor, Pius XII did not dismiss the concerns of socialists without due consideration. He warned against the excesses of unchecked capitalism (which could also become an oppressive system if not properly subordinated to Christian charity) and declared that the worker must be “supported and sustained in his legitimate demands and expectations.”
In highlighting these concerns and how Christianity might best address them, Pius XII reveals the utter incapacity of socialism to respect the inherent dignity of man as well as the true dignity and purpose of the worker.
Instead of seeking solace in the empty promises of socialism, Pius XII urges Christians to order their lives and work toward God. To that end, he recommends St. Joseph as a model and patron, pointing out that “there could not be a better protector to help you to let the spirit of the gospel penetrate your life.”
A tangible example
In placing workers under the patronage of St. Joseph, the pope gives them a tangible example on which to model their labor and their lives and a visible counter to the socialist idea of work as a merely material endeavor.
Today, we may no longer be threatened by the looming behemoth of the Soviet Union, but we still contend with the rise of communist China and the rampant secularization of our own workplaces. We can still look to St. Joseph as an example of “the dignity of the worker.”
It is as important now as ever to recall that our work is, above all else, in service to God. It is from this service that we draw pleasure and meaning in our work. Do not fall for the empty platitudes and vain anthems of the socialists and their May Day. We know that true solidarity and true meaning in our work and in our lives are found in joyful service to Christ our Lord.
50 Years After Vietnam, Our Troops Remain Demoralized By Defeat
We would do well to consider how our choices in Vietnam affected our military and society in ways still felt today.Ending All Visas For Chinese Students Could Send Them Into The Arms Of The CCP
The recently introduced 'Stop CCP VISAs Act' could inflict more damage on U.S. national security than it prevents.The New York Times Compares Trump’s Presidency To The Chinese Cultural Revolution, But Survivors Disagree
'There are lots of Chinese Cultural Revolution survivors in this country, but The New York Times has no courage and no objectivity to talk to us.'How Trump’s ‘Reverse Nixon’ Foreign Policy Can Avoid Nixon’s Costly Mistakes
President Trump’s 'reverse Nixon' approach carries profound risks, as the current geopolitical realities starkly contrast those of the 1970s.A child’s guide to why billionaires should, in fact, exist
Americans have largely rejected the left’s silly, childish push for communist ideology over the past 15 years or so. But some of these folks refuse to move on.
In a recent post on X, Melanie D’Arrigo, the executive director of the Campaign for New York Health and vice president of legislation at the New York National Organization for Women, repeated several long-debunked talking points:
If we capped wealth at $999,999,999 we could invest almost $5.9 trillion into improving our country.
And if you’re upset at transferring wealth down, why are you ok with how we pass laws to transfer wealth up— from the working class to billionaires?
Billionaires shouldn’t exist.
Since this is the equivalent of a toddler’s rant, I thought I would provide a toddler’s guide to why billionaires should, in fact, exist.
Mommy, why are there billionaires?
The label of “billionaire” is nothing more than an accounting of the net worth that someone has. But most billionaires aren’t swimming around in a room full of gold coins like Scrooge McDuck (which would be impossible anyway). They have most of their net worth tied up in owning a valuable business.
Typically, billionaires have established businesses that employ other people and provide goods and services that others want. Because consumers find those goods and services worthwhile, the business becomes more valuable. Based on the value at any point in time, the founder or manager’s share of that business could be “worth” a billion dollars or more. If it stopped providing value, it could be worthless.
Why should you or anyone else get to decide that someone has 'too much' wealth?
Billionaires exist most of the time because they created a lot of value for others, as well as themselves.
But aren’t billionaires bad?
Creating value is never a bad thing. Generating jobs and providing essential goods and services play a crucial role — arguably more important than most of what the government does these days!
Why can’t we just take away their money?
Taking someone’s money away is theft. Theft is wrong and a violation of your property rights, honey. Someone can’t just come in here and say you have too many toys and take some of them away. One can’t say that your room is too big and others need shelter, so you have to let strangers sleep in your room.
As Thomas Sowell said, “I have never understood why it is ‘greed’ to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.” It sounds like you are the one being greedy, sweetie!
But why can’t we just cap their money at $999,999,999?
You just made up that number. And the word you’re looking for is wealth. Why should you or anyone else get to decide that someone has “too much” wealth?
Also, incentives drive outcomes, so if you cap wealth, you limit the incentives for others to make investments, to innovate, and to provide important value to the world.
That money could help other people!
Wealth isn’t just other people’s money. In many cases, it isn’t money at all. Businesses provide value that benefits others.
More government funding hasn’t led to better results. Spending has increased over time, yet the only clear beneficiaries are government cronies!
America remains one of the most generous nations, donating more to charity than any other country in the world.
But it’s almost $6 trillion!
If you tried to take away billionaires' business stakes, the value of those businesses would go down, so you would never see the $6 trillion, and it would hurt the wealth of middle-class Americans whose pensions and 401Ks are invested in the stocks of those companies.
Also, the U.S. government spent almost $7 trillion last year, so taking that money wouldn’t fund the government for even a year, and then where would the government get money the next year?
Your arguments truly make no sense — which I guess is understandable since you are a toddler.
I don’t care! Billionaires shouldn’t exist!
Adults who use toddler logic shouldn’t exist, but here we are. Now, go eat your vegetables.
I hope this guide proves useful when Bernie Sanders, Robert Reich, Melanie D’Arrigo, or someone else presents a toddler-level argument about billionaires.
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com