Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: How To Achieve A Free Society? (Ron Paul Endorsed Author)

  1. #1

    How To Achieve A Free Society? (Ron Paul Endorsed Author)

    "Private ownership in production is squarely based on the Ten Commandments. It obviously rests on the Eighth Commandment: Thou shalt not steal.

    The private-ownership system also builds on the solid foundation of the Sixth Commandment: Thou shalt not kill, which includes every form of coercion and violence.

    To freely exchange goods and services, the contracting parties must not deceive each other. They must not bear false witness, which is the Ninth Commandment of the Decalogue."

    -Hans Sennholz


    Ron Paul, on Hans Sennholz:
    Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the life and achievements of Hans F. Sennholz. Dr. Sennholz was one of the foremost free-market economists of his generation and an inspiration to tens of thousands of people around the world."
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul397.html


    The Christian system provides a self-contained theory of temporal self-ownership and non-aggression. It has all the elements needed for a voluntary society of free people.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Nice post! Sennholz is great IMHO. (though I've only read a bit of his stuff so far)
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  4. #3
    Hans F. Sennholz (February 3, 1922 – June 23, 2007) (born in Brambauer, Germany) was an economist of the Austrian school of economics who studied under Ludwig von Mises. After serving in the Luftwaffe in World War II, he took degrees at the universities of Marburg and Köln. He then moved to the United States to study for a Ph.D. at New York University. He was Ludwig von Mises's first PhD student in the United States.

    He taught economics at Grove City College, 1956–1992, having been hired as department chair upon arrival. After he retired, he became president of the Foundation for Economic Education, 1992–1997.

    Calvinist Political Philosopher, John W. Robbins pointed out in a book printed in honor of Sennholz shortly after his death that "Sennholz,[...]rests his defense of a free society on revelation."

    Fellow Austrian Joseph Salerno has notably praised Sennholz as an under- appreciated member of the Austrian school who "writes so clearly on such a broad range of topics that he is in danger of suffering the same fate as Say and Bastiat. As another fellow Austrian Joseph Schumpeter pointed out, these two brilliant nineteenth-century French economists, who were also masters of economic rhetoric, wrote with such clarity and style that their work was misjudged by their British inferiors as 'shallow' and 'superficial'."

    2008 U.S. presidential candidate Ron Paul credits his fascination with economics to meeting Sennholz and getting to know him well. Peter Boettke, Deputy Director of the James M. Buchanan Center for Political Economy at George Mason University, first learned economics from Sennholz as a student at Grove City College.
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Sennholz

  5. #4
    In contrast to his secular colleagues, Sennholz rests his defense of a free society on information revealed by God. In that, he has displayed far more perspicacity than most other contemporary apologists for freedom.

    In a 1987 book, Debts and Deficits, he wrote, “A [political and economic] reform…would have to restore the harmony of interests and repair moral standards. It would have to rebuild the economic order on the old foundation of the Eighth Commandment – Thou shalt not steal – and the Tenth – Thou shalt not covet anything that is thy neighbor’s.”
    http://trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=271

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by AquaBuddha2010 View Post
    The Christian system provides a self-contained theory of temporal self-ownership and non-aggression. It has all the elements needed for a voluntary society of free people.
    Indeed it does, as does the elder Hindu system. It is amazing, how freedom is encoded into the religions which are dedicated to worshiping the Almighty Lord!

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Yieu View Post
    Indeed it does, as does the elder Hindu system. It is amazing, how freedom is encoded into the religions which are dedicated to worshiping the Almighty Lord!
    Well, that is your case to make. I don't say that the religions of the world are encoded with freedom, they are encoded with slavery. Only with Christ is there freedom, and then we are free indeed.

    I don't know how you get self-ownership from transcendentalism...so it is your case to make.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by AquaBuddha2010 View Post
    Well, that is your case to make. I don't say that the religions of the world are encoded with freedom, they are encoded with slavery. Only with Christ is there freedom, and then we are free indeed.

    I don't know how you get self-ownership from transcendentalism...so it is your case to make.
    There is much in scripture that could be quoted to provide a solid case for freedom in Hinduism, but I will provide a only a few that touch on points that you have touched on.

    Hinduism is not 'transcendentalism'; specifically, Vaishnavism (approximately 70% of Hindus) is very similar to Christianity in that it is all about devotion to the Supreme Lord. The goal in Vaishnavism is to go to the Lord when we quit this body, and true freedom is only obtained by liberation in the spiritual world with the Supreme Lord... here on the temporary material world, there is only a reflection of the ultimate freedom and liberation that can be experienced through love and service to the Lord in the spiritual world. Luckily, the Lord has given us instruction in how to become liberated from this material world.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bhagavad Gita
    BG 16.1-3: The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: Fearlessness; purification of one's existence; cultivation of spiritual knowledge; charity; self-control; performance of sacrifice; study of the Vedas; austerity; simplicity; nonviolence; truthfulness; freedom from anger; renunciation; tranquillity; aversion to faultfinding; compassion for all living entities; freedom from covetousness; gentleness; modesty; steady determination; vigor; forgiveness; fortitude; cleanliness; and freedom from envy and from the passion for honor — these transcendental qualities, O son of Bharata, belong to godly men endowed with divine nature.

    BG 16.4: Pride, arrogance, conceit, anger, harshness and ignorance — these qualities belong to those of demoniac nature, O son of Pṛthā.
    There is more, but this touches on the points that you mentioned. Non-violence and compassion for all living entities is the essence of the 6th Commandment, and not coveting or envying are aspects of the 8th and 10th Commandments. Charity assumes a system of private property, otherwise, what would you have to give? So, we see the same system laid out in these prior texts. In fact, there is much more similar about Christianity and Hinduism than one would think! I understand them as revealing different aspects of the same faith for the same Supreme Lord that we both hold dear to our hearts.

    Regarding your comments regarding religion, the Lord says:

    Quote Originally Posted by Bhagavad Gita
    BG 18.66: Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear.
    Last edited by Yieu; 09-02-2011 at 08:54 PM.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Yieu View Post
    There is much in scripture that could be quoted to provide a solid case for freedom in Hinduism, but I will provide a only a few that touch on points that you have touched on.

    Hinduism is not 'transcendentalism'; specifically, Vaishnavism (approximately 70% of Hindus) is very similar to Christianity in that it is all about devotion to the Supreme Lord. The goal in Vaishnavism is to go to the Lord when we quit this body, and true freedom is only obtained by liberation in the spiritual world with the Supreme Lord... here on the temporary material world, there is only a reflection of the ultimate freedom and liberation that can be experienced through love and service to the Lord in the spiritual world. Luckily, the Lord has given us instruction in how to become liberated from this material world.



    There is more, but this touches on the points that you mentioned. Non-violence and compassion for all living entities is the essence of the 6th Commandment, and not coveting or envying are aspects of the 8th and 10th Commandments. Charity assumes a system of private property, otherwise, what would you have to give? So, we see the same system laid out in these prior texts. In fact, there is much more similar about Christianity and Hinduism than one would think! I understand them as revealing different aspects of the same faith for the same Supreme Lord that we both hold dear to our hearts.

    Regarding your comments regarding religion, the Lord says:

    Mmmm hmmm. If all is one and I am only trapped in sensing distinctions because of Maya, how does that provide a theory of self-ownership? All is one, right?

    Please don't deceive yourself into thinking that Hinduism is anywhere close philosophically to Christianity. The two systems are worlds apart in their conceptions of the universals and particulars.

    Christians do not believe in a unified chain of being between God and man. Christians believe we take part in God's nature morally, not metaphysically. There is a radical metaphysical chasm in Christianity between God and man that can never be bridged.

    In history, from the Pharoahs to secular Communists, this idea of a unified chain of being has been the catalyst for the total state. When men believe they can metaphysically take part in the nature of divinity, then men become gods...and men exercise their godship most powerfully in the State.

    Also, Hinduism traps men into thinking that their works can justify them before a holy God. There is nothing more averse to Christianity than this idea.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Also, not to point out the obvious here, but I can point to history where Protestant economic and political thought has produced freedom and prosperity in culture. It's fruit can be verified historically. If someone was going to make the case that freedom and prosperity were the fruits of Hindu cultures, it would have to be shown historically.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by AquaBuddha2010 View Post
    Mmmm hmmm. If all is one and I am only trapped in sensing distinctions because of Maya, how does that provide a theory of self-ownership? All is one, right?

    Please don't deceive yourself into thinking that Hinduism is anywhere close philosophically to Christianity. The two systems are worlds apart in their conceptions of the universals and particulars.

    Christians do not believe in a unified chain of being between God and man. Christians believe we take part in God's nature morally, not metaphysically. There is a radical metaphysical chasm in Christianity between God and man that can never be bridged.

    In history, from the Pharoahs to secular Communists, this idea of a unified chain of being has been the catalyst for the total state. When men believe they can metaphysically take part in the nature of divinity, then men become gods...and men exercise their godship most powerfully in the State.

    Also, Hinduism traps men into thinking that their works can justify them before a holy God. There is nothing more averse to Christianity than this idea.
    Oh, good... so your adversity to Hinduism arises only out of misunderstandings, if your concerns are limited to the above. There are many false characterizations of Hinduism out there, and just about every point you brought up is not believed by Vaishnavas. This is good -- it gives me an opportunity to explain just how similar Vaishnavism is to Christianity. Keep in mind here, I am not concerned with other branches of Hinduism. I am only concerned with the strict and predominant Vaishnava view, which I believe is the most scripturally supported view, as opposed to those watered down views which were brought to the West more than the Vaishnava understanding.

    Yoga-Maya is one of the Supreme Lord's transcendental energies. Maya means illusion; it is an energy of the Lord which allows us to forget Him if we so chose, as we do have free will and He does not force us to acknowledge Him. When one is 'in Maya,' they are accepting the Material conception of the Material universe and rejecting the spiritual nature of the Supreme Lord. Does this not sound familiar?

    Vaishnavas do not believe man to be either descended from God or 'one with God'. We do not believe in the theory of 'all is one' as the ultimate truth. 'All is one' is a partial understanding, and a misleading one at that. 'All is one' means that Everything and Everyone is created by and owned by God. It does not mean 'we are God' or 'we are gods' or 'we can become God' or 'we are equal to God' -- all that is utter nonsense! 'All is one' is only an elementary understanding of the science of God, and one that is more often than not misunderstood or mischaracterized. To assist in trying to understand this concept, I will provide the Invocation of Sri Isopanishad, the topmost of the 108 Upanishads, a Vedic holy scripture.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sri Isopanishad - Invocation
    oḿ pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idaḿ
    pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate
    pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya
    pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate

    The Personality of Godhead is perfect and complete, and because He is completely perfect, all emanations from Him, such as this phenomenal world, are perfectly equipped as complete wholes. Whatever is produced of the Complete Whole is also complete in itself. Because He is the Complete Whole, even though so many complete units emanate from Him, He remains the complete balance.
    A better understanding of this 'all is one' concept is that everything the Lord has created, including the material and spiritual worlds, as well as humans and all created beings, are created by and owned by the Lord, but never equal to Him. The version of 'all is one' perpetuated in the West is a complete misunderstanding. The correct understanding is more in-tune with the Christian belief. It is not possible to 'become God' or to 'merge with God'. We do not 'descend from God' -- we are His creation, and as such we are rightfully owned by Him. There are three energies of the Lord: spiritual, marginal, and material. We belong to his marginal energies; as such, we can lay no claim to being 'divine'.

    Though we own ourselves to the extent that we control our free will, self determination, and karmic destiny, the Lord is the Supreme Proprietor, in that He is the ultimate proprietor of all of His creation. Though we temporarily assume proprietorship of our body and our material belongings and the fruits of our labor while we inhabit the body, once we die we lose all of those temporary possessions, though we still have our self. Only the Lord has eternal ownership of His creation.

    Also, in conclusion I will address the misconception that 'mundane works can save is a concept in Hinduism' that you concluded with.

    Quote Originally Posted by Srimad Bhagavatam
    SB 6.1.9: Mahārāja Parīkṣit said: One may know that sinful activity is injurious for him because he actually sees that a criminal is punished by the government and rebuked by people in general and because he hears from scriptures and learned scholars that one is thrown into hellish conditions in the next life for committing sinful acts. Nevertheless, in spite of such knowledge, one is forced to commit sins again and again, even after performing acts of atonement. Therefore, what is the value of such atonement?

    SB 6.1.10: Sometimes one who is very alert so as not to commit sinful acts is victimized by sinful life again. I therefore consider this process of repeated sinning and atoning to be useless. It is like the bathing of an elephant, for an elephant cleanses itself by taking a full bath, but then throws dust over its head and body as soon as it returns to the land.

    SB 6.1.11: Śukadeva Gosvāmī, the son of Vedavyāsa, answered: My dear King, since acts meant to neutralize impious actions are also fruitive, they will not release one from the tendency to act fruitively. Persons who subject themselves to the rules and regulations of atonement are not at all intelligent. Indeed, they are in the mode of darkness. Unless one is freed from the mode of ignorance, trying to counteract one action through another is useless because this will not uproot one's desires. Thus even though one may superficially seem pious, he will undoubtedly be prone to act impiously. Therefore real atonement is enlightenment in perfect knowledge, Vedānta, by which one understands the Supreme Absolute Truth.

    *Note: The Supreme Absolute Truth means the Supreme Lord.
    So you can see, that trying to gain atonement through works is thoroughly condemned by the Vedic authorities in the Srimad Bhagavatam, in this case by the spiritual master/guru Sukadeva Goswami.

    I must note here that what Sukadeva Goswami might be misunderstood here without some background information. The last sentence in the quote seems to imply that through mere mundane knowledge one can be saved. That is not at all what is meant by what he stated, though. What he was referring to is called jnana yoga. Jnana means knowledge, and yoga means cultivating a relationship with God. Jnana yoga therefore is not merely mundane knowledge -- it is a process of studying the scriptures and adhering to their instruction for surrendering to God, with love. In Hinduism, there are multiple paths to go to God, and this is one of them, but I consider it to be not the best or most direct path. I believe the path of Bhakti yoga to be the most direct path in Hinduism, as bhakti yoga means cultivating a relationship of loving devotional service with the Lord. That is not a path that relies on material fruitive works to be saved, and it is not a process of an endless cycle of atonement and sin, which is condemned in the above quote. It is a spiritual process of cultivating a relationship with the Lord, through surrender and love.

    I hope I was able to explain away your listed concerns. If you would like more explanation, or have additional concerns, feel free to bring them up, as I feel that interfaith dialog such as this is beneficial to all parties involved!
    Last edited by Yieu; 09-02-2011 at 10:26 PM.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by AquaBuddha2010 View Post
    Also, not to point out the obvious here, but I can point to history where Protestant economic and political thought has produced freedom and prosperity in culture. It's fruit can be verified historically. If someone was going to make the case that freedom and prosperity were the fruits of Hindu cultures, it would have to be shown historically.
    When you look to the scriptures such as the Mahabharata, Ramayana, Srimad Bhagavatam, and Bhagavad Gita, and you understand them as historical accounts, then you can see the fruit of the culture and how it produced freedom. The age of Kali, which started some 5,100+ years ago, has brought about degradation of all culture, so more modern history is not an indicator of how things were in previous ages.

  14. #12



Similar Threads

  1. State or Private Law Society? [Ron Paul endorsed author]
    By Conza88 in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 05-29-2012, 05:08 AM
  2. State or Private Law Society? [Ron Paul endorsed author]
    By Conza88 in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-27-2011, 09:24 AM
  3. [SOLUTION?] 'Opting-Out' - How to Achieve Libertarian Society in the Context of the State?
    By Sentient Void in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 06-03-2011, 09:56 PM
  4. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-06-2011, 11:56 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-28-2010, 05:50 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •