This last week I happened across an article by Brian R. Mecham which contained Thomas S. Monson’s comments at the funeral of W. Cleon Skousen in January 2006.1 At the time of the funeral, Thomas S. Monson served as the First Counselor in the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
So, as I read Mr. Mecham’s article and listened to some audio excerpts from President Monson’s funeral address, I wondered why such a man should be pilloried as Mr. Skousen has been of late in the media.2
Mr. Skousen rose to national prominence with the publication of The Naked Communist which was originally published in 1958 at the request of David O. McKay3, then the President of the LDS Church. The book quickly became a national bestseller despite never being reviewed by the New York Times, the New York Herald Tribune or the Saturday Review.
According to Earl Taylor, Jr. the following is an excerpt of how Mr. Skousen came to write this book,
Shortly after we moved to Utah in 1952 and joined the faculty of Brigham Young University, I was asked to give talks on the threat of Communism as I encountered it in the FBI. There were two of us who specialized in this subject and we were the only ones allowed to speak on Communism in case Mr. Hoover could not take the talks himself.
As time went by I noticed that nearly every time the newspapers advertised that I would speak on Communism in Salt Lake City, David O. McKay would be in the audience. In due time he wrote to Ernest L. Wilkinson, the BYU president, and suggested that a text on Communism should be written by the heads of departments at BYU with myself serving as chairman of the committee.
We held a few meetings but Dr. Richard D. Poll of the History Department as well as the Dean of Economics and several other heads of departments seemed to know nothing about the core problem. They were not reading the bi-partisan reports of the Congressional hearings and they had not studied Marxist philosophy and tactics sufficiently to understand the reports published by these committees.
Finally the members of the committee recommended to President Wilkinson that I be given the assignment of researching and writing the book so I didn’t have to spend all the time in our meetings trying to explain to them what the latest Communist developments were. That’s how I got the assignment to write the text on Communism.
About two years later, after the text was finished, I sent it to several people who had spent years studying Communism and asked for their suggestions. They sent back warm commendations but very few suggestions. I then took the manuscript to President Wilkinson and learned to my amazement that the faculty would not support him in having a text on Communism published by the University. They suggested that I publish it. Of course, I had no money to do that since I had taken quite a severe cut in salary to accept my position at the Y.
Nevertheless, President McKay told me to go ahead and he would back me up. However, a series of unexpected financial blessings came to us so I was able to print 5,000 copies without asking him for help. The art work for the book was done by the well-known artist and friend, Arnold Friberg, while the layout and editing was done by another good friend, Keith Eddington, who also became a well-known artist and editor. Thomas S. Monson was in charge of Publisher’s Press and President McKay encouraged him to go ahead and print the book. To this day, he continually reminds me that he printed my first national best-seller.4
The article goes on to explain how Mr. Skousen wrote The Naked Capitalist5 and contains references to Dr. Carroll Quigley’s Tragedy and Hope. For additional information, see W. Cleon Skousen – Biography.
Sources:
- “An Open Letter to Latter-day Saint Detractors of W. Cleon Skousen and His Works“. 22 Oct 2009. Latter-Day Conservative. 15 Nov 2009.↩
- See, for example, Zaitchik, Alexander. “Meet the Man Who Changed Glen Beck’s Life”. 16 Sep 2009. Salon. 15 Nov 2009. See also, Kristine. “Skousen in Dialogue”. 16 Sep 2000. Common Consent. 15 Nov 2009.↩
- Mecham. “W. Cleon Skousen Is Asked to Write the Naked Communist”. Nov 1998. Latter-Day Conservative. 15 Nov 2009.↩
- Ibid.↩
- The premise for The Naked Capitalist corroborates Antony Sutton’s work – see Skull and Bones. See also Hugh W. Nibley’s observations about the technology agreements between the Allies and Axis powers in IG Farben and Hugh Nibley.↩
Related posts
Tags: Brigham Young University, Communism, David O. McKay, Freedom
-
Dan
on November 16, 2009 at 8:42 am
You’re wondering why Skousen is so pilloried? Because he was wrong. And sadly so were most of the church leadership. It’s not that they were wrong about communism being bad, it is all the other stuff related to the fear of communism that they were wrong.
“I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.”—Frank Herbert “Dune”
Skousen’s mind was killed by fear.
-
Brian Mecham
on November 16, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Dan, no they were not wrong. Those same dangers (Loss of freedom and Liberty) face our nation today… take the same warnings those prophets were giving in the past during the time when the threat was openly communism and simply change the word to socialism, progressivism, humanism, Fabianism, etc and it fits with the problems that we are facing today in America.
-
Steve
on November 16, 2009 at 3:38 pm
The problems around Skousen were significant.
First, he got his start giving lectures where he claimed he had worked for the FBI fighting Communist. Simply not true. He was an administrative bureacrat. The FBI opened a file on him and clearly thought he was someone who lectured and wrote for the money, not principle.
His book The Naked Capitalist are filled with bizarre conspiracy theories including the silly world bankers conspiracy to take over the world (yeah, we’ve seen how competent they are recently).
Then he founded the Freemen Institute which supposedly taught “constitutional principles”. Of course, Skousen created the texts which were filled with historical errors. (The Constitution and its principles are vitally important but silly scholarship undermines it rather than helps).
President Kimball specifically distributed a memo forbidding any tying of the church to the Freemen Institute.
Skousen was closely affiliated with the John Birch Society (ie. the folks that thought Dwight Eisenhower, the liberator of Europe, was a communist). He spoke often are their events.
The bottom line is that Cleon Skousen was a fraud both in terms of his made-up biography and in terms of his alleged expertise. Further, he hurt the cause of liberty and respect for the Constitution by undermining the credibility of those supportive of both.
President Monson is a kind soul. When he was asked by the Skousen family to speak at the funeral he went and spoke kind words. He praised him as a teacher liked by his students. His comment were geared towards Skousen’s spirituality. But, it is a significant stretch to translate that into an endorsement of Skousen’s political views.
P.S. Salon had a recent article on Skousen that is very insightful: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/09/16/beck_skousen/index.html
-
Dan
Brian,
We are facing as much of a “loss of freedom and liberty” now as we were then: almost no loss. In fact, I would venture to say we are more free and liberated today than ever before. Was it really possible for someone like Glenn Beck to say the utterly guttural things he says about Obama back in the day about the president then? You claim a “loss of liberty and freedom” but have no hard facts to back that up, just a “feeling.” A sense of strangulation, of suffocation. Let me tell you what this is. Disappointment and disillusionment that your philosophical ways are rejected by the majority of Americans. You can’t stand that, and thus you say your freedom and liberty are at risk. They aren’t. Not in the least. They never were. But like Skousen, the only way you can see the world around you, is through the eyes of a victim. There is a sense of comfort, an odd, but disturbing comfort in being a victim. It is pathological. It is dangerous, and it is not sustainable in the long run. There is a sense of shakiness that goes with calling oneself a victim so frequently. Rise above this, conservatives. Stop playing the victim card. Stand for something rather than stand against something.
-
Brent Hartman
on November 17, 2009 at 10:03 am
It’s sad when people refuse to see the enemy that is about to destroy them.
“the blind gropeth in darkness, and thou shalt not prosper in thy ways: and thou shalt be only oppressed and spoiled evermore, and no man shall save thee.”
Oh well, there’s nothing I can do.
-
Brent Hartman
Dan,
Here’s a book for you to read, “EVERYTHING I WANT TO DO IS ILLEGAL: War Stories from the Local Food Front“, by Joel Salatin. We are not free in this country. Your assertion that “we are more free and liberated today than ever before” is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. The government taxes and regulates almost every aspect of our lives. Even our death is taxed. You call that free? Have the slaves been captive so long that they don’t remember what true freedom is? How sad and pathetic.
-
Dan
Brent,
By all means. Show the enemy. Stop the word games. God is not a God of confusion and chaos, but a God of order and knowledge. Stop fussing around and show your evidence. If it is anything comparable to what Skousen showed, then you’ve got nothing.
-
Greg
on November 17, 2009 at 4:45 pm
Dan – Here are some resources you may want to consider. The first is the book Prophets, Principles and National Survival. From the introduction to the book:
This work, Prophets, Principles and National Survival, is intended to be a compilation of what some of the Prophets of this dispensation, and from earlier dispensations, whom the members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have sustained as Prophets, Seers and Revelators—particularly the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles—have spoken or written, while they were Prophets, concerning many of the issues pertinent to us today. All of the material has appeared in official Church publications, in published books or pamphlets, or in reprints of speeches or articles distributed with the permission of the individual quoted. No private correspondence of these Prophets has been used, except possibly in those cases where it was later made public.”
That there would be a group (or groups) of people seeking the overthrow of the government is evident from Joseph Smith’s prophecy in Constitution to Hang by a Thread. In addition, since the Book of Mormon was expressly written for our day (Mormon 8:34-35), a read about the Gadianton Robbers, the group that led to the destruction of the Nephite government, may be beneficial.
-
Brent Hartman
Gadianton Robbers? That’s just a conspiracy theory.
-
Dan
Greg,
There’s always a group attempting to overthrow any government. Heck, we employ an organization that does this on a regular basis (the CIA—which by the way employs a number of Mormons—highly conservative Mormons I might add). How exactly does the CIA fit in any debate regarding the Gadianton Robbers? They sure seem to fit the bill far more easily than any other shady organization that the likes of Skousen could dream up in his fantasies. Yet nary a word against the CIA. Why not? See, we like our Gadianton Robbers when they overthrow other governments we don’t particularly like, even democracies. The CIA overthrew a democratically elected government in Iran in 1953 over a matter of oil. Seems like a perfect example of Gadianton Robbers, or at the very worst a far better stretch of a comparison than anything Skousen had. I mean, heck, Skousen thought that the biggest capitalist elites of the world were secretly communist! What a bunch of poppycock!
The burden of proof that rests on your shoulders, I agree, is much harder to prove because you’re coming at an angle that your enemy works in secret, thus attempts at exposing his dirty work tends to be far messier and unclear. But much of what Skousen talks about simply doesn’t pass the smell test. And this is key. Take his argument that the world’s capitalist elites are secretly communist. Why would those who already control the world through their capital need to be secret communists? That just makes no sense whatsoever. Guys like Skousen are so paranoid that they look past the simpler answer thinking that the simpler answer couldn’t possibly be true because they think no answer is that simple.
But let’s just look at what we know of the Gadianton Robbers. They were corrupt individuals who were within the government and society, who, upon being caught, flee. That discovery removes the cloak of secrecy on who they are and how they operate. It’s really that simple. What are Gadianton Robbers today? One is quite easy: Al-Qaeda. A secret group bent on upending the established nation-state system. Another: The CIA. This one is slightly more muddy, because after all, it is an arm of the larger organization: The United States Government. But the CIA most definitely qualifies as an example of a modern day Gadianton Robbers group. They work in secret, and they work to destabilize other governments.
Are you really going to tell me that modern day capitalists in charge of Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Barclay’s, GE, etc. are actually working to upend and destroy the very institutions that have given them all this money? Are you freaking kidding me?
I’m sorry but on this issue the leaders of the church from the 1930s-1980s were working, in the words of Elder Bruce R. McConkie, on a “limited understanding.” They can easily be forgiven because those times were harsh on Americans so hammered with self-inflicted fear of the Reds that they truly could not see beyond their fears. But today’s Americans have no excuse. We are far more educated and ought to have a far better understanding of the world around us. It should be noted that since 1990 no LDS prophet has spoken in the same fashion as Skousen/Benson. Isn’t that interesting?
-
Greg
Hey Dan – Thanks for your comments. It appears this is the first post on which you’ve commented.
It is not the purpose of this blog to prove anything. Rather, it is exploratory in nature and examines issues from a variety of points of view.
Only the passage of time can vindicate Mr. Skousen’s writings. But the scriptural and historical patterns that describe such groups are revealing.
-
John
on November 18, 2009 at 8:36 am
Admirable as your campaign to reconstruct the image of Cleon Skousen might be, the man was a nut and was recognized as such by virtually everyone. He is a testament to the fact that conspiracy theories never really die, they just target someone else.
-
Greg
John – This is not a “campaign” and your ad hominem is duly noted. Thanks for dropping by.
-
Pete
on November 19, 2009 at 11:34 am
Regarding others’ comments that some leaders “distanced the church from” Skousen’s teachings or that “since 1990 no LDS prophet has spoken in the same fashion as Skousen/Benson” — it brings to mind Joseph Smith stating (to paraphrase) “teach them good principles and they will govern themselves.”
As independent agents on the earth we are expected to gain knowledge as individuals and evaluate events and things around us according to revealed truth. If the prophets dictated how we were to respond to all of man’s dealings, we would lose our agency. This applies to everything – politics, “science”, writings of W. Cleon Skousen, etc.
The scriptures and the prophets have given us guidance on how to detect truth. If you’re found that truth, hold to it and you will have an increase. Don’t get caught up in things that are of no eternal import, but also keep in mind that truth is “one eternal round.”
-
Greg
Thanks for the great reminder Pete.
-
Dan
Pete,
Jeez, com’on man. There is a direct correlation between the end of speaking about communism by church leaders and the fall of the Soviet Union. It’s clear as the light of day.
Secondly, Joseph Smith’s standard is a very good one. The key word in his statement is “good” principles. Sadly, the Skousen/Benson fearmongering were not based on “good” principles. Thus, Joseph Smith’s statement does not apply to Skousen/Benson.
Thirdly, let’s talk of truth. In the 1800s it was an established fact among church doctrine that blacks were descendants of Cain cursed with the same curse Cain got, and thus second class citizens, unworthy of certain blessings. Was that really truthful? Of course not. Based solely on their own understanding, they saw it as the truth. But it was not. See, we place our own perceptions upon what we see and then claim that as the truth. But that’s not always the case.
In the case of Skousen, he was of the errant belief that America’s capitalist leaders were secretly communists. This is highly laughable and easily discarded if not for the fact that he had the ear of prophets. Skousen is a poison to Mormon theology because he made an attempt to place his personal view and feelings as the truth, and that if someone were to question it, they were going against ‘the truth’ and thus should be shunned or even removed from membership. Very dangerous stuff.
When pressed on the accuracy of Skousen’s views, few actually attempt to defend him. Greg, for instance, here, says “thanks for your comments, nothing to see, move along.” No actual defense of Skousen’s points. So com’on. Defend Skousen. Prove him correct, or step back and let him get pilloried for daring to state his errant views as true as the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
-
Greg
Dan:
Can you provide any evidence to support the “direct coorelation” you mention above? It would be helpful if it is “clear as the light of day” if you could link to some source to substantiate your claim.
Are you inferring that the “secret combinations” mentioned so prominently in the Book of Mormon are not somehow “good” principles?
Are you suggesting that we should not be concerned about these “murderous combinations” of which the book warns (Ether 8:23-24)?
As previously stated, the purpose of this blog is exploratory in nature. Readers can weigh the evidence for themselves and make their own determination. In order to be taken seriously, it would be helpful if you could substantiate your own claims.
-
Tony
on November 21, 2009 at 6:25 pm
Argh! I may never decide where I stand on issues such as this and the health bill. This is why I am a moderate. I have talked to both democrat and republican members in an attempt to see the differing arguments and try to look at it objectively, though we all have a bias.
Ultimately, I look to God and His Spirit to guide me.
Needless to say, I can’t stand politics. Can’t stand it!That being said, the religious works of Cleon Skousen are awe-inspiring and a testament to his spiritual strength and character.
-
Dan
Greg,
Here we go.
I did a search on LDS.org. The search was as follows. The keyword was “communism.” The target dates were January 1, 1988 – November 1, 2009. In advanced functions, I selected presidents, prophets and quorum of the Twelve. Nothing else. Simply the leaders. If a Seventy said something, I didn’t care to bother. They are not as influential as the Quorum of the Twelve or the First Presidency. For this search result, I received 18 results.
Elder Dallin H. Oaks May 2006. He says:
“For example, we know of many cases where the Lord has been manifesting Himself to men and women in the nation of Russia, so recently released from the long grip of godless communism”
President Gordon B Hinckley July 1994
In this, he speaks fondly of Ezra Taft Benson who had just died. Benson, in Hinckley’s words, fought against “godless communism.” The important note to this is that Hinckley never mentions that we must keep up the fight against “godless communism.”
President Thomas S Monson May 2006
“I have experienced many opportunities. One occurred 21 years ago, prior to the time when the German Democratic Republic—or East Germany, as it was more commonly known—was freed from Communist rule.”
Freed from communism. A notable theme emerges.
Elder Dallin H Oaks October 1992
“Last April my Church duties took me to Albania. Elder Hans B. Ringger and I were some of the first Western visitors to that newly opened country. We conferred with government officials about the reception our church’s missionaries would receive in Albania, which had banned all churches in 1967. They told us the government regretted its actions against religion, and that it now welcomed churches back to Albania. One explained, “We need the help of churches to rebuild the moral base of our country, which was destroyed by communism.” During the past months I have heard this same reaction during discussions with government and other leaders in Bulgaria, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine.
In contrast, consider what we hear about religion from some prominent persons in the United States. Some question the legitimacy of religious-based values in public policy debates. Some question the appropriateness of churches or religious leaders taking any public position on political issues.
Provoked by that contrast, I will use this occasion to speak about the role of religion-based values and religious leaders in public policy debates.”
Note in this particular talk no mention of any communism destroying America’s right to freedom of religion. And this was in 1992.
And we come to my favorite:
President Howard W. Hunter October 1993
“More recently, Elder Marion G. Romney, then of the Quorum of the Twelve, counseled the Church. This was twenty-five years ago, when the world also knew some difficulty. An American president had been assassinated, communism was alive and menacing, and a war was beginning to widen in Southeast Asia. My sons were of college age at that time, and they had some of the same anxieties young adults today have about life and marriage and the future. Here’s what President Romney said then:”
“communism was alive.” In the past tense. Ah… the truth shall set you free.
Now, let’s compare with the previous 20 years. January 1, 1968 – January 1, 1988. For some odd reason, checking just the leadership reduces the results to only 2, but unchecking the leadership gives you 57 results, including leadership. Very odd. In any case, 57 results, and of course the very first one. Yes, Ezra Taft Benson.
President Benson November 1979
“It is well to ask, what system established secret works of darkness to overthrow nations by violent revolution? Who blasphemously proclaimed the atheistic doctrine that God made us not? Satan works through human agents. We need only look to some of the ignoble characters in human history who were contemporary to the restoration of the gospel to discover fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy. I refer to the infamous founders of Communism and others who follow in their tradition.
Communism introduced into the world a substitute for true religion. It is a counterfeit of the gospel plan. The false prophets of Communism predict a utopian society. This, they proclaim, will only be brought about as capitalism and free enterprise are overthrown, private property abolished, the family as a social unit eliminated, all classes abolished, all governments overthrown, and a communal ownership of property in a classless, stateless society established.
Since 1917 this godless counterfeit to the gospel has made tremendous progress toward its objective of world domination.
Today, we are in a battle for the bodies and souls of man. It is a battle between two opposing systems: freedom and slavery, Christ and anti-Christ. The struggle is more momentous than a decade ago, yet today the conventional wisdom says, “You must learn to live with Communism and to give up your ideas about national sovereignty.” Tell that to the millions—yes, the scores of millions—who have met death or imprisonment under the tyranny of Communism! Such would be the death knell of freedom and all we hold dear. God must ever have a free people to prosper His work and bring about Zion.”
Ah, such poetry.
President Marion G Romney March 1980
“In distinguishing communism from the United Order, President David O. McKay said that communism is Satan’s counterfeit for the gospel plan, and that it is an avowed enemy of the God of the land. Communism is the greatest anti-Christ power in the world today and therefore the greatest menace not only to our peace but to our preservation as a free people. By the extent to which we tolerate it, accommodate ourselves to it, permit ourselves to be encircled by its tentacles and drawn to it, to that extent we forfeit the protection of the God of this land.”
ah, music to the ears, right?
President Harold B. Lee January 1973
“How should we combat the threat of Communism throughout the world?”
Ah nostalgic reminiscing.
CONCLUSION:
Note the difference. Note the absence. After the Soviet Union fell, nary a warning about the dangers of communism. So what have prophets been warning us about since 1990? Well, I did another basic search. For the word “pornography.” In the 20 year period from 1968 to 1988, there were 27 articles by leaders of the church on the topic. From 1988 to 2009 there were 314!. Yes THREE HUNDRED FOURTEEN! wow. Sheesh, what do you think our modern prophets think we should be worried about these days? Methinks it is the stuff you can see on your internets. Methinks they think communism is like dead. Let me conclude with President Howard W. Hunter who said it best:
“communism was alive.”
-
Dan
Greg,
My comment went into moderation (probably spam). I had lots of links in it. But it is my response to you. I would appreciate it if you were to free it and add it to the list of comments.
-
Greg
Dan – All comments are moderated. All of your comments were approved. To which comment were you referring?
-
Greg
Dan – As your research suggests, there are very few direct references from Church leaders to these groups from a given time period (based on my own research, it is much earlier than you suggest). Although you stated “Methinks they think communism is like dead”, that seems more like a supposition on your part versus what they actually “think.”
While there may be many reasons for the apparent silence on this topic, as the many posts on Fascism, Socialism, Communism, Collectivism, Capitalism and recent events attest, the world’s societies are in collision as suggested in the post Polarization in the Book of Mormon.
It is very unlikely Church leaders are unaware of worldwide circumstances and the unique local political circumstances with which they must deal.
Perhaps there are other reasons for this silence which may not be readily apparent to the casual observer.
-
Dan
Greg,
Although you stated “Methinks they think communism is like dead”, that seems more like a supposition on your part versus what they actually “think.”
Well, as they are silent for the past 20 years, I can only make suggestions. The fact is that there is a noticeable difference between these 20 years and the previous 20 years. And what happened 20 years ago was the collapse of communism. You asked for a direct correlation, and I have given it to you. Before 1989, they spoke against communism passionately. After 1989, they spoke of it only in reference to when it was alive.
Perhaps there are other reasons for this silence which may not be readily apparent to the casual observer.
Please, share. I gave you my reasons with fairly sound backing. I dare you to do better.
While there may be many reasons for the apparent silence on this topic, as the many posts on Fascism, Socialism, Communism, Collectivism, Capitalism and recent events attest, the world’s societies are in collision as suggested in the post Polarization in the Book of Mormon.
What do you mean that the world’s societies are “in collision” as suggested in the Book of Mormon? I see your post, but it only is a link to a rather vague section of a Nibley quote. What I mean by that is that neither you nor Nibley offer any actual evidence that the “world’s societies are in collision.” This is a bit shoddy on both your part and on Nibley’s part. It is not scientific.
Finally,
As your research suggests, there are very few direct references from Church leaders to these groups from a given time period (based on my own research, it is much earlier than you suggest)
So… are you suggesting here that the brethren stopped talking about communism BEFORE communism actually died?
-
Greg
Dan – I appreciate the fact that you provided links to sources that show this change occurred because like you, I believe it significant. Though, at least to my knowledge, the Brethren have never explicitly stated why they stopped mentioning communism, socialism and other such groups in their public discourses. Consequently, we are left to our own devices why that may have occurred.
While the references provided may seem vague and oblique, the patterns such groups exhibit are apparent in societies across the world (see Connor’s posts The Fall of the Berlin Wall and Prophetic Political Silence for examples). And as Nibley pointed out years ago, capitalism and socialism/communism are based on a common philosophy of materialism. They are like two magnets that repel each other. That is one aspect of the “collision” to which I refer above.
I wish you the best in finding answers to the many questions and issues you’ve raised.
-
loquaciousmomma
on November 29, 2009 at 1:19 pm
Dan,
I have a few ideas as to why the Church no longer warns about communism. I do not have any first hand knowledge, only my thoughts, but they are food for thought nonetheless.
First, and most likely, is the fact that after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Soviet Union, the world was ready to put the whole communism threat behind them. When communism was “alive”, the presidency of the church had a hard time convincing the members that there was anything to be concerned about, despite repeated discussions over many years. Would this same tough crowd actually have taken them seriously once the wall fell, were they to attempt to discuss any remaining threat? Communism has never left China or Cuba, so there was still some possibility of a communist influence on the world, even without the USSR. Yet, the common sense of the time was that capitalism had won and communism had been roundly spanked and sent on its way. No one wanted to hear otherwise.
Second, the political landscape was much different before the wall fell. The 80’s introduced political correctness and it was much harder to be taken seriously when discussing politics as a church. In the late 90’s it became uncouth for churches to discuss political things, especially our church, now doing so can cost a religion it’s tax exempt status, or at least raise threats of doing so.
Third, as you aptly pointed out, the most important thing the Brethren have needed to discuss is indeed pornography and the entire “tidal wave” of wickedness we are engulfed in. Sadly, there is little time for discussion of politics, as there is so much work to be done on the morality front. This does not necessarily mean that communism is not a threat, it is just less of a threat than the immediate destruction of the souls of members being washed away by the wave of filth. You can’t fight communism if your brain is addled by muck.
Finally, I think we have already crossed a threshold in which the warned of events have taken place. We didn’t listen. We are now reaping the whirlwind. You say that the current financial crisis is evidence of the ineptitude of the bankers, just look at the mega profits of JP Morgan Chase Co these days. They always benefit from financial downturns. Look at Goldman Sachs, and how well they are doing. Greed has driven them to do this, and now we are hearing the discussion of a global currency (Special Drawing Rights) and global governance. In the G20 meeting the US gave away more sovereignty as we agreed to have more oversight by the IMF. There are definite benefits for the international bankers from the downturn, i.e. more power.
Our society has corrupted as we were warned it would be to weaken us for a communist takeover. Skousen’s 45 communist goals were right on track for the most part. Many of them have been achieved and many others have had significant steps taken toward their achievement. The only one that I can say an absolute no way to is number 35-the FBI is fine and well, although it did suffer pie in the face during the Bush/9-11 finger pointing era.
I can say for certain that our society has changed immensely since Skousen warned us about communism, and it is interesting how much of our current problems mirror the society anti-communists warned us that we were being manipulated to accept.
I thought for sure that the government actually taking over companies, disregarding long-held rules governing secured creditors in bankruptcy, and telling companies what they can pay their CEO’s would awaken people to the fact that in a blink of an eye, we became a socialist nation, inasmuch as we are embracing socialist policies.
We are not more free today than we have ever been. We may feel so because we are more free from social restraints, unless we want to use certain words that are, well, UN-pc. We have so many laws on the books that at any moment we just might be breaking a law we are not even aware of. Laws tend to focus more on intent than actual criminal behavior, these days, so it is much easier to be framed for a crime, especially in the internet age. We are not free to protest as we were in years past, without a permit (which will probably not be given if there is a high profile event we wish to protest). I will not list every way in which our freedoms are diminished, but I will say that there are many.
When we empower the government to free us from the consequences of our decisions, we inevitably give up some of our freedom so that they may do so. We have done so in a big way, and the US is not the same place it was fifty years ago for it.
-
Greg
Thanks for your comments loquaciousmomma. Unless I am mistaken though, it seems that the seeds of these efforts started long before recent events (e.g. “telling companies what they can pay their CEO’s”). That is, excepting the fact that you meant to suggest recent events should have awakened people to the fact that the U.S. is on the fast track to socialism. Then I’d have to agree. There seems to be a paucity of understanding how these groups have historically operated. Oskar Lange suggested one such strategy:
A socialist government really intent upon socialism has to decide to carry out its socialization program at one stroke or to give it up altogether . . . Any hesitation, vacillation and indecision would provoke the inevitable economic catastrophe. Socialism is not an economic policy for the timid. (Market Socialism).
-
loquaciousmomma
I agree with you, Greg. This has been a long time coming. I did mean that recent events should have awakened people to our precarious situation.
When mainstream media outlets make statements like “capitalism is dead”, you would think people would wake up and take notice.
Great quote by the way!
Search
27 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link: http://www.believeallthings.com/4133/cleon-skousen/trackback/