Jubilee Economics

In Leviticus 25, the Lord outlines a radical plan known as the "Year of Jubilee." This idea carries profound economic implications. To get a grasp on the overall concept, I'd encourage you to read the whole chapter.

To understand the Year of Jubilee, we must momentarily set aside our modern understanding of private property and real estate. The Judaic system was not based on deeds and brokers, but rather on history and family blood. It sacramentalized the simple warmth and deep history of "the old homeplace."

In a sense, the land owned the family more than the family owned the land. That is why, in verse 13, it speaks of everyone "returning to their possession." Land doesn't wander about and get disoriented - people do. Perhaps you have noticed how the forest never gets lost.

So every 50 years, every family in the nation returns to their historic inheritance. The donkeys brayed, the children shouted, and the dust flew. Creaking carts of household goods and herds of startled livestock criss-crossed the countryside. It must have been quite a scene - a sort of mini-exodus, with all the accompanying chaos and drama.

In the interim, property was "bought" and "sold" conventionally, although the price was pro-rated based on the relative distance or immanence of the Jubilee (vs. 15-16), since this event unilaterally nullified all of these transactions.

What is fascinating about this idea is that it is neither truly socialist or truly capitalist, but rather a hybridization of the two. The capitalist has no Year of Jubilee, while the socialist has a perpetual one. Both ideologies contain damaging excesses.

Competition and incentive are necessary for a healthy economy. God provided a generous window for the talented and ambitious to expand their business, expand their assets, and reap (literally) the appropriate rewards from their effort.

This headlong expansion, however, was capped at 50 years, effectively preventing the formation of mega-corporations like we have today - these hallmarks of full-blooded capitalism like Wal-Mart or Microsoft. Families were given the chance to make a new start on a level playing field, which would serve to stimulate an atmosphere of industry and possibility, rather than creating an endless spiral of apathy and despair.

The beauty and ingenuity in this system is that it restores equality without resorting to robbery, which is more than can be said of socialism. There is no arbitrary seizure of goods, (with the consequent throat-slitting of honest labor and enterprise,) because the equalization is anticipated beforehand, and woven into the economic fabric of the society.

I do not know the value or viability of applying this model to modern society, which is no longer predominately agrarian. It is nonetheless a striking economic strategy, and one which may have useful applications that are yet to be discovered.

Image courtesy of biblicalstudies.info

Pundit Profile: Victor Davis Hanson

As a regular at library book sales who is learning about the literary world as I go, I often find myself following my nose. It's always surprising where this random process of discovery will lead.

Recently I selected two books - independently of one another - authored by a Victor Davis Hanson (website). Sometime later, going about my normal reading and research, I discovered that - what do you know - he's blogging for Pajamas Media.

Victor Davis Hanson, or V.D.H. as he is called, is a professor and military historian who grows raisins in California's central valley. That last enterprise (the raisins) is important: I have a spontaneous appreciation for intellectuals who include a little dirt in their diet, and though I'm sure I differ with Hanson significantly on many points, I respect his commitment to anchor himself in something tangible. That is valuable.

Hanson is an advocate of classical education, a supporter of the Iraq war, and a disillusioned Democrat. He writes prolifically, concentrating mainly on the historical interplay between war and culture: a significant discussion, to be sure.

At this level, this is not about agreement or disagreement: it's just about putting people on the map. I do not read classic literature because I agree with it, I read it in order to know what it says.

In a complex novel, it takes a few chapters before you're able to get the characters straightened out and start following the plot. The world is like that. It takes some time to begin to understand the plethora of essential personalities who have figured a part in the literary, technological, military, and philosophical history that has shaped - and is shaping - our world.

Image courtesy of helleniccomserve.com

The Philosophy of Tolkien

After completing The Lord of the Rings trilogy, I turned to Peter Kreeft's book The Philosophy of Tolkien to further explore the worldview behind the story. Kreeft has done an excellent job - indeed, there are perhaps few in our time who are better qualified for this task.

Finding ourselves - through no choice of our own - here in the modern age, it is enjoyable to read an author with such a remarkable blend of enthusiasm and composure. Too often it is one or the other: stagnant, wooden precision, or reckless, energetic nonsense. Kreeft commits neither error.

Some credit must also be given to C.S. Lewis, who is quoted liberally, perhaps even more than Tolkien himself. Seeing that Lewis and Tolkien were such close contemporaries, and that Lewis's writings were so much more prolific, this balance of quotations seems justified.

Kreeft considers 50 philosophical questions, which serve as the skeleton of the book. It is a very useful strategy to introduce the lay philosopher to the rich tapestry of philosophical thought, and there are gentle constraints to keep your thinking from taking a dangerous turn, rather like bumper-bowling.

I have found Kreeft's Catholicism naggingly irritating - like a rock in my shoe. There are deep-seated differences those of us with an Anabaptist inclination have with Catholics (and Protestants too, for that matter,) and I find many aspects of Catholicism theologically disturbing.

The notable absence of Biblical references was somewhat disquieting; the Bible ought to be opened reverently and frequently in any discussion probing what is true, good, and truly good.

I have my disagreements with some of Kreeft's conclusions regarding ethics, but right now these things are simmering within me - breaking in, like a stiff pair of new boots, until they become even and supple. As Gandalf says, the wise speak only of what they know. Most of us are under the wry delusion that words constitute wisdom: say something - anything - but for heaven's sake do not be silent! Oh that we might recover the days when silence was a virtue, and a free mouth was understood to be the plainest mark of a fool.

Image courtesy of tolkiengateway.net

The Dangers of Digitalization

We are living in a digital age. Companies are scrambling to package technology into new devices that will continue to make digital entertainment and communication ever more convenient, and ever more pervasive in people's lives. Indeed, society itself is driving this innovation.

The iPod is an obvious example. All of a sudden, everyone needs one. Companies have even talked people into paying for video capability, as if anyone really wants to watch videos on a little 2" screen. Businessmen depend on their Blackberry's ability to keep them up-to-date and on schedule. Cell phones are as plentiful as those once-important telephone poles, (which will no doubt appear to future civilizations as some remarkable, continent-wide Stonehenge.)

The headquarters for all of this multimedia is, of course, the ubiquitous PC (or Mac, if you prefer). Here, everything is updated, charged, and "synced." And you have email. And blogs. And news. And forums. And chat. And shopping. And school. And music. And games.

You have a whole other world.

Listen to what Eric Lidow, the 94-year-old CEO of International Rectifier, had to say in a recent interview with EETimes:

I'm very impressed by the advances in computers, but there's a tremendous danger to our education because of the availability of computers and the place they take in children's lives. They're spending too much time in front of the screen and not enough time relating to other kids. I think it's very serious, actually. You don't want Internet kids growing up to be antisocial - because that's what's happening. And I really pity those people who try to get married on the Internet.

The subtle snare in technology is that it leads you to believe that you are doing something truly meaningful. It seduces you into buying an alternate reality. It is a fantasy, not in the worst sense, but neither in the most noble.

It flatters us that we can connect so well with other "people." It fascinates us to have access to so much news and information. We feel as if we're really apprehending the world.

The obvious and startling truth is that we're really not apprehending the world at all. Look at you! You're sitting at a desk somewhere, totally absorbed by a sterile, unblinking array of colored pixels. And the more you "apprehend the world," the more you return to this very spot. The whole thing is really quite ludicrous. It's not broadening you and opening you up; it's narrowing you down, gluing you to the screen, systematically stripping you of your autonomous self.

This is not to say that there is no value in technology. There is. However, as useful as technological tools may be, we must remember that they are just that: tools.

The problem is that technology is not satisfied to be a mere tool. It wants to be regarded as a lifestyle, just as Caesar wasn't content to be a king and demanded that he be worshipped as a god. Society is in real danger of unknowingly making this quiet mental adjustment. Indeed, it may already be too late. However, if you're reading this, it probably isn't - at least not for you.

Will we rise up against the dehumanization, or will we just be "one of the dominoes"? I'm not talking about going to war, I'm just talking about stopping to think. If we don't, one day we may wake up and find that our paradise has become a prison.

The headlines in the dailies
Are the horses in a race
They lead you to believe
Life and death are commonplace
Some believe it
And I'm crying again

I've heard some good intentions
Not all were secondhand
But bravado and pretension
Will not feed a hungry man
It's been said before
And I'm crying again

Very quietly
The world loses blood overnight
Without a fight
And in the morning
The sickness will hide in the light
Out of sight

Running from a world
That they will never understand
The masses ride their passions
With the throttle in their hands
Nobody knows
What is waiting around the bend

Now and then the criminal
In my skin lets out a sigh
He'd like to think he's innocent
But he cannot tell a lie
Truth is like a knife
And I'm crying again

-Mark Heard

Image courtesy of geeksontime.com

Listen Between the Lines

Do we listen between the lines
Or are we slaves
To logic
Addicted
Compulsively
To technicalities

Can we share the simple wonder
Of silence
Or must we abide this clatter -
These clumsy approximations
Of living thought -
Words - brittle words

Is there no balm
In Gilead
For ears that have dulled
For hurried hearts -
Staccato
And cold

Is there no cure
For pallid rhymes
Barren of meaning
Like the stale hush
Of late-morning
When the dew is gone

Do we listen between the lines
Or are we slaves
Numb as death
Afraid to argue
Afraid to agree
Dreaming that we're awake

Image courtesy of stormcarib.com

Fantasy: Wisdom or Waste?

Since my first forays into fantasy, my distrust of the genre has continued to diminish gradually. I am at present roughly halfway through J.R.R. Tolkien's classic masterpiece The Lord of The Rings, and for the most part am enjoying it very much.

When you are raised in the faith, there is a tendency for the truth to turn stale. Spiritual matters are not exempt from the old and wise adage that "familiarity breeds contempt." For this reason, songs that use unexpected rhymes and stories that use unexpected characters are a welcome refreshment. As G.K Chesterton noted in The Everlasting Man: "In the specially Christian case we have to react against the heavy bias of fatigue. It is almost impossible to make the facts vivid, because the facts are familiar; and for fallen men it is often true that familiarity is fatigue." (-G.K. Chesterton, The Everlasting Man, Ignatius Press, p. 17)

It may be prudent to draw a distinction between pulp fantasy, and fantasy from deep Christian authors like Lewis or Tolkien. I had and yet have little use for the former, and for many years grouped works such as The Chronicles of Narnia or The Lord of The Rings into this same category, considering the whole business a profound waste of time. In this manner I unknowingly discarded the apple with the worm.

Christian teachers I respect have various perspectives on this question. Jonathan Lindvall refers to Tolkien's trilogy as "literary junk food," seeming to imply that fantasy is fantasy - and an exercise in futility. On the other side you have Peter Kreeft, who draws heavily from Tolkien and Lewis and, referring to The Lord of The Rings, observes matter-of-factly that "the book is obviously inspired; it's got God's fingerprints all over it." (Some of Kreeft's excellent material on Tolkien include this lecture and this book.)

It seems to me that fantasy, far from detracting from reality, actually reinforces it. It enables us to step away from the din and dust of the world enough to view it with new eyes. Some perhaps have been led astray by drawing incorrect or unintended analogies from fantasy, but the same could be said of the Book of Revelation.

It is curious to me that those who take issue with Narnia or The Lord of The Rings almost universally embrace John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress as good solid Christian literature. I do not see a wide difference between these works and Bunyan's, in terms of fantastical content. Perhaps it has something to do with the explicit use of Witches, or Wizards, or Goblins, or Elves. Perhaps it is preferable to use Demons, Fiends, evil Giants, and wild Beasts.

It's all the same war.

Image courtesy of gamesbyscott.com

The Evils Of Alcohol, Part 3

I thought it fitting to close this topic (earlier posts here and here) with some thoughts from C.S. Lewis. They require no commentary, so I will add none.

May we press on to maturity, in the spirit of Galatians 5:13.

Temperance is, unfortunately, one of those words that has changed its meaning. It now usually means teetotalism. But in the days when the second Cardinal virtue was christened 'Temperance,' it meant nothing of the sort. Temperance referred not specially to drink, but to all pleasures, and it meant not abstaining, but going the right length and no further. It is a mistake to think that Christians ought all to be teetotallers; Mohammedanism, not Christianity, is the teetotal religion. Of course it may be the duty of a particular Christian, or of an Christian, at a particular time, to abstain from strong drink, either because he is the sort of man who cannot drink at all without drinking too much, or because he wants to give the money to the poor, or because he is with people who are inclined to drunkenness and must not encourage them by drinking himself. But the whole point is that he is abstaining, for a good reason, from something which he does not condemn and which he likes to see other people enjoying. One of the marks of a certain type of bad man is that he cannot give up a thing himself without wanting everyone else to give it up. That is not the Christian way. An individual Christian may see fit to give up all sorts of things for special reasons - marriage, or meat, or beer, or the cinema; but the moment he starts saying the things are bad in themselves, or looking down his nose at other people who do use them, he has taken the wrong turning.

One great piece of mischief has been done by the modern restriction of the word Temperance to the question of drink. It helps people to forget that you can be just as intemperate about lots of other things. A man who makes his golf or his motor bicycle the centre of his life, or a woman who devotes all her thoughts to clothes or bridge or her dog, is being just as 'intemperate' as someone who gets drunk every evening. Of course, it does not show on the outside so easily: bridge-mania or golf-mania do not make you fall down in the middle of the road. But God is not deceived by externals.

-C. S. Lewis

Image courtesy of sheppardsoftware.com

The Gardener

On the third day the friends of Christ coming at day-break to the place found the grave empty and the stone rolled away. In varying ways they realised the new wonder; but even they hardly realised that the world had died in the night. What they were looking at was the first day of a new creation, with a new heaven and a new earth; and in a semblance of the gardener God walked again in the garden, in the cool not of the evening but the dawn.

-G.K. Chesterton, The Everlasting Man, Ignatius Press, p. 213

Image courtesy of freegroups.net

Priuses, Politics and Poverty

I am not a scientist.

Then again, maybe I am - in the sense that I like to understand the way things work, and why. But I can do without the test tubes and molecular structures. It's more about enjoying the warmth of the sun on your face than calculating precisely how much vitamin D you're absorbing.

Politics has had science in a headlock for some time now over the issue of global warming. Not being a scientist, I do not claim to know how much is honest and how much is hullabaloo: let's just say my faculty of suspicion is alive and well.

Some of it claims to be serious; most of it is downright stupid. Green is "in": drive a Prius, eat asparagus, do yoga, save the earth.

It is a noble idea, this saving the earth is. So noble that droves of people are enlisting without even asking who the enemy is. And therein lies the danger, for the aim of most politicians is to make you too queasy for questions. Al Gore has built an entire political career around the temperature of the North Pole.

Whatever truth there may be to global warming, the plain fact remains that the whole thing falls flat on its face when stacked against a pressing worldwide menace like poverty. Starvation is killing people - every three seconds - as millions of dollars are spent to avert a contrived disaster that is hundreds of years away. The Bible has a good bit more to say about caring for the poor then it does about cooling the planet. So what is the problem?

The problem is that poverty is too easy. Indeed, Jesus himself noted the stark simplicity of the task. There are plenty of honest, efficient relief organizations working hard to help the poor. Local Rescue Missions covet our support. It's as obvious and uncomplicated as writing a check.

Forget about carbon offsets. Share your lunch.

Image courtesy of harmsy.freeuk.com

On Starfish and Spiders

A couple weeks ago a friend loaned me a copy of The Starfish and the Spider, one of those New York Times-ish style books with catchy analogies and double spaced text. Authored by a couple of flat-earthers, the book examines decentralization as an organizational theory.

They survey a spectrum of organizations - from eBay to AA - to develop their point, which is, namely, that "leaderless" organizations are virtually "unstoppable" because their lifeblood and DNA is spread out across many independent cells, like a starfish, instead of being concentrated in a central location, like a spider.

You can squash a spider and really mess up his day, but when you cut apart a starfish, the plot backfires: each piece turns itself into a whole new organism.

As my friend intimated when he gave me the book, I believe there are useful spiritual truths here; more perhaps than even the authors themselves realize. Though unbelievers, they have been speaking about this concept at house church conferences, fulfilling Luke 16:8 and articulating something that the Church has become terribly confused about.

Some of the examples used in the book seem questionable, and certain activities that are technically criminal, (such as pirating music or vandalizing laboratories,) are presented as positive and inevitable.

The authors operate from that fuzzy but fantasized premise that depravity has been disproven - or at least outmoded - quoting one of Wikipedia's founders as saying "Wikipedia proves that people are basically good." (Later, a bit less enthusiastically, they quote a PayPal employee who contributes some cynicism and reality - "If you were to tell someone at PayPal that people are basically good, they'd laugh in your face" - even the parade must detour around the crime scene.)

However, if you can put up with the drive-thru-esque tone, there is certainly some insight here, presented in an unconventional way. This sort of book is not written for those of us who are used to reading carefully, so it pays to adjust your strategy a bit to avoid wasting time looking for depth that isn't there. You have to read things as they are designed to be read: in this case, quickly.

Image courtesy of barnesandnoble.com