And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

I find the the description of an “accuser” to be very interesting…and condemning.

Interesting because Christ is the advocate with the Father and not the accuser. Condemning because I am often the accuser. And when I am, it is a sign that I am on the wrong side of things. The accuser feels nothing of love, understanding, compassion, or interest in those they accuse. The accuser see someone to blame; someone as the problem. The advocate sees at least a fellow member of the human race, a brother or sister; and at most someone to rescue.

The advocate sees others in a state of evil, such as corruption and power grabbing, as persons to fight for not against. A person to save not destroy.

And least you think I am accusing the accuser, let me just say I am a recovering accuser…we all are. In life I am more and more convinced that there are two primary motivations: advocate or accuser. Love is the realm of the advocate.

And as a side note, I think history bares out that those who want to control, enslave and tyrannize, love nothing more than a fight. They know how to turn it to their advantage every time. This goes to a common misunderstanding that many people have that “fight” for freedom. They think battle is battle, more or less. One is like the other. Nothing could be more wrong! When men fight wars the objective is to destroy the other side. Simple. But in the battle for freedom the objective is to save, strengthen, and preserve the other side. Because the right minded freedom fighter understands that to become the destroyer of those who seek his destruction is only replacing their brand of tyranny for his own. There is no way around the law of the harvest; what we sow, we reap. I am not advocating passivity, I am advocating love. Violence and love are not mutually exclusive, but accusation and love are.

The war of the advocate is asymmetrical, and when it is the tyrant is completely baffled. The advocate’s war is to show the tyrant that tyranny is not a reality, it is illusion that will crumble under its own weight. Tyranny lacks permanence, and only appears to be real when seen in the limited view of history. Only charity endures, it never fails.

Thanks Mike for your intriguing thoughts.

Best

I was searching the interwebs for your name and came across this blog. If you remember who I am give me a holler. I’d like to know how you are doing.

Yan

And I agree that there is more equality under a Euro-style social democracy than in the U.S.

Regarding the Vanguard: I understand that it’s supposed to disappear, but I don’t see that happening. Do you have a good historical example of that or is it that we haven’t given socialism enough time to get there?

I have no problem with a monetary system — a fungible commodity for easier exchange of goods.

And again, I think you’re setting up a bit of a false dilemma between capitalist-fascism and totalitarian-socialism.

Marx (and I) would have the collective be in charge — real democracy (with some safeguards against too much majoritarian dominance over minorities). No “someone else” in charge, but “everyone else” in charge.

2. I don’t agree that inequality is necessarily worse under something like state-run socialism than it is under capitalism. In fact, I think equality tends to be much better in Euro-style social democracies than it is in the U.S.

Again, between us it’s a matter of emphasis.