Biblical Blueprints

Where are they? What are they?

I shortened the name for the North books, and to the last North page I added his Biblical Blueprints series (original link – my local link).

Included in the Blueprints are:

Biblical Blueprints: Introduction
Biblical Blueprint: Education
Biblical Blueprint: International Relations
Biblical Blueprint: Welfare
Biblical Blueprint: Money
Biblical Blueprint: Economics
Biblical Blueprint: Government
Biblical Blueprint: Politics
Biblical Blueprint: Divorce and Remarriage
Biblical Blueprint: Family

Thoughts on Blueprints

Reconstructionists tend to be of the intellectual/nerdy/bookish site.
We are good at making blueprints, but not so hot on building popular political movements.

Fair enough: I suspect that the prophets were not too far from this mindset.

But… thoughts without action are dead.

Fortunately, Moses laid down personal governance in a rather easy-to-do manner:

  • First, govern yourself well
  • Second, govern your family well
  • Third: gather ten family heads (usually men) under an elder they have chose, and work together to reach godly goals, from house building to soup kitchens to homeschool networks to apprenticeship opportunities.

The next public civil government unit are fifty families, then a hundred families, then a thousand.

Singles aren’t part of this network: a man should be a proven and successful family head to be a public leader (this includes teachers & pastors, by the way). And the elder is selected from the community, and not from some elitist hierarchy or guild.

This can be handled in the city or the country, wherever mutual support is easiest.

You don’t ask your Masters for permission to govern yourself.

You and your people just do it.

Little by little, step by step, we will take the land.

I trust that these guides will be useful, when we have become fixed on living free under the Laws of God, and it’s time to plan out our actions, slowly expanding the Kingdom of God “on earth, as it is in heaven.”

Exactly as Jesus commanded.

What Are Biblical Blueprints?

From What are Biblical Blueprints? by Gary North

—<Quote begins>—

How many times have you heard this one?

“The Bible isn’t a textbook of . . .”

You’ve heard it about as many times as you’ve heard this one:

“The Bible doesn’t provide blueprints for . . .”

The odd fact is that some of the people who assure you of this are Christians. Nevertheless, if you ask them, “Does the Bible have answers for the problems of life?” you’ll get an unqualified “yes” for an answer.

Question: if the Bible isn’t a textbook, and if it doesn’t provide blueprints, then just how, specifically and concretely, does it provide answers for life’s problems? Either it answers real-life problems, or it doesn’t.

In short: Does the Bible make a difference?

Let’s put it another way. If a mass revival at last hits this nation, and if millions of people are regenerated by God’s grace through faith in the saving work of Jesus Christ at Calvary, will this change be visible in the way the new converts run their lives? Will their politics change, their business dealings change, their families change, their family budgets change, and their church membership change?

In short: Will conversion make a visible difference in our personal lives? If not, why not?

Second, two or three years later, will Congress be voting for a different kind of defense policy, foreign relations policy, environmental policy, immigration policy, monetary policy, and so forth? Will the Federal budget change? If not, why not?

In short: Will conversion to Christ make a visible difference in our civilization? If not, why not?

The Great Commission

What the Biblical Blueprints Series is attempting to do is to outline what some of that visible difference in our culture ought to be. The authors are attempting to set forth, in clear language, fundamental Biblical principles in numerous specific areas of life. The authors are not content to speak in vague generalities. These books not only set forth explicit principles that are found in the Bible and derived from the Bible, they also offer specific practical suggestions about what things need to be changed, and how Christians can begin programs that will produce these many changes.

The authors see the task of American Christians just as the Puritans who came to North America in the 1630’s saw their task: to establish a city on a hill (Matthew 5:14). The authors want to see a Biblical reconstruction of the United States, so that it can serve as an example to be followed all over the world. They believe that God’s principles are tools of evangelism, to bring the nations to Christ. The Bible promises us that these principles will produce such good fruit that the whole world will marvel (Deuteronomy 4:5-8). When nations begin to marvel, they will begin to soften to the message of the gospel. What the authors are calling for is comprehensive revival-a revival that will transform everything on earth.

In other words, the authors are calling Christians to obey God and take up the Great Commission: to disciple (discipline) all the nations of the earth (Matthew 28:19).

What each author argues is that there are God-required principles of thought and practice in areas that some people today believe to be outside the area of “religion.” What Christians should know by now is that nothing lies outside religion. God is judging all of our thoughts and acts, judging our institutions, and working through human history to bring this world to a final judgment.

We present the case that God offers comprehensive salvation-regeneration, healing, restoration, and the obligation of total social reconstruction–because the world is in comprehensive sin.

To judge the world, it is obvious that God has to have standards. if there were no absolute standards, there could be no earthly judgment, and no final judgment because men could not be held accountable.

(Warning: these next few paragraphs are very important. They are the base of the entire Blueprints series. It is important that you understand my reasoning. I really believe that if you understand it, you will agree with it.)

To argue that God’s standards don’t apply to everything is to argue that sin hasn’t affected and infected everything. To argue that God’s Word doesn’t give us a revelation of God’s requirements for us is to argue that we are flying blind as Christians. it is to argue that there are zones of moral neutrality that God will not judge, either today or at the day of judgment, because these zones somehow are outside His jurisdiction. In short, “no law-no jurisdiction.”

But if God does have jurisdiction over the whole universe, which is what every Christian believes, then there must be universal standards by which God executes judgment. The authors of this series argue for God’s comprehensive judgment, and we declare His comprehensive salvation. We therefore are presenting a few of His comprehensive blueprints.

The Concept of Blueprints

An architectural blueprint gives us the structural requirements of a building. A blueprint isn’t intended to tell the owner where to put the furniture or what color to paint the rooms. A blueprint does place limits on where the furniture and appliances should be put–laundry here, kitchen there, etc.–but it doesn’t take away our personal options based on personal taste. A blueprint just specifies what must be done during construction for the building to do its job and to survive the test of time. It gives direction to the contractor. Nobody wants to be on the twelfth floor of a building that collapses.

Today, we are unquestionably on the twelfth floor, and maybe even the fiftieth. Most of today’s “buildings” (institutions) were designed by humanists, for use by humanists, but paid for mostly by Christians (investments, donations, and taxes). These “buildings” aren’t safe. Christians (and a lot of non-Christians) now are hearing the creaking and groaning of these tottering buildings. Millions of people have now concluded that it’s time to: (1) call in a totally new team of foundation and structural specialists to begin a complete renovation, or (2) hire the original contractors to make at least temporary structural modifications until we can all move to safer quarters, or (3) call for an emergency helicopter team because time has just about run out, and the elevators aren’t safe either.

The writers of this series believe that the first option is the wise one: Christians need to rebuild the foundations, using the Bible as their guide. This view is ignored by those who still hope and pray for the third approach: God’s helicopter escape. Finally, those who have faith in minor structural repairs don’t tell us what or where these hoped-for safe quarters are, or how humanist contractors are going to build them any safer next time.

Why is it that some Christians say that God hasn’t drawn up any blueprints? If God doesn’t give us blueprints, then who does? if God doesn’t set the permanent standards, then who does? If God hasn’t any standards to judge men by, then who judges man?

The humanists’ answer is inescapable: man does–autonomous, design-it-yourself, do-it-yourself man. Christians call this man-glorifying religion the religion of humanism. It is amazing how many Christians until quite recently have believed humanism’s first doctrinal point, namely, that God has not established permanent blueprints for man and man’s institutions. Christians who hold such a view of God’s law serve as humanism’s chaplains.

Men are God’s appointed “contractors.” We were never supposed to draw up the blueprints, but we are supposed to execute them, in history and then after the resurrection. Men have been given dominion on the earth to subdue it for God’s glory. “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Then God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth'” (Genesis 1:27-28).

Christians about a century ago decided that God never gave them the responsibility to do any building (except for churches). That was just what the humanists had been waiting for. They immediately stepped in, took over the job of contractor (“Someone has to do it!”). and then announced that they would also be in charge of drawing up the blueprints. We can see the results of a similar assertion in Genesis, chapter 11: the tower of Babel. Do you remember God’s response to that particular humanistic public works project?

Never Be Embarrassed By the Bible

This sounds simple enough. Why should Christians be embarrassed by the Bible? But they are embarrassed . . . millions of them. The humanists have probably done more to slow down the spread of the gospel by convincing Christians to be embarrassed by the Bible than by any other strategy they have adopted.

Test your own thinking. Answer this question: “Is God mostly a God of love or mostly a God of wrath?” Think about it before you answer.

It’s a trick question. The Biblical answer is: “God is equally a God of love and a God of wrath.” But Christians these days will generally answer almost automatically, “God is mostly a God of love, not wrath.”

Now in their hearts, they know this answer can’t be true. God sent His Son to the cross to die. His own Son! That’s how much God hates sin. That’s wrath with a capital “W.” But why did He do it? Because He loves His Son, and those who follow His Son. So, you just can’t talk about the wrath of God without talking about the love of God, and vice versa. The cross is the best proof we have: God is both wrathful and loving. Without the fires of hell as the reason for the cross, the agony of Jesus Christ on the cross was a mistake, a case of drastic overkill.

What about heaven and hell? We know from John’s vision of the day of judgment, “Death and Hades [hell] were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire” (Revelation 20:14-15).

Those whose names are in the Book of Lite spend eternity with God in their perfect, sin-free, resurrected bodies. The Bible calls this the New Heaven and the New Earth.

Now, which is more eternal, the lake of fire, or the New Heaven and the New Earth? Obviously, they are both eternal. So, God’s wrath is equally ultimate with His love throughout eternity. Christians all admit this, but sometimes only under extreme pressure. And that is precisely the problem.

For over a hundred years, theological liberals have blathered on and on about the love of God. But when you ask them, “What about hell?” they start dancing verbally. If you press them, they eventually deny the existence of eternal judgment. We must understand: they have no doctrine of the total love of God because they have no doctrine of the total wrath of God. They can’t really understand what it is that God in His grace offers us in Christ because they refuse to admit what eternal judgment tells us about the character of God.

The doctrine of eternal fiery judgment is by far the most unacceptable doctrine in the Bible, as far as hell-bound humanists are concerned. They can! believe that Christians can believe in such a horror. But we do. We must. This belief is the foundation of Christian evangelism. It is the motivation for Christian foreign missions. We shouldn’t be surprised that the God-haters would like us to drop this doctrine. When Christians believe it, they make too much trouble for God’s enemies.

So if we believe in this doctrine, the doctrine above all others that ought to embarrass us before humanists, then why do we start to squirm when God-hating people ask us: “Well, what kind of God would require the death penalty? What kind of God would send a plague (or other physical judgment) on people, the way He sent one on the Israelites, killing 70,000 of them, even though they had done nothing wrong, just because David had conducted a military census in peacetime (2 Samuel 24:10-16)? What kind of God sends AIDS?” The proper answer: “The God of the Bible, my God.”

Compared to the doctrine of eternal punishment, what is some two-bit judgment like a plague? Compared to eternal screaming agony in the lake of fire, without hope of escape, what is the death penalty? The liberals try to embarrass us about these earthly “down payments” on God’s final judgment because they want to rid the world of the idea of final judgment. So they insult the character of God, and also the character of Christians, by sneering at the Bible’s account of who God is, what He has done in history, and what He requires from men.

Are you tired of their sneering? I know I am.

Nothing in the Bible should be an embarrassment to any Christian. We may not know for certain precisely how some Biblical truth or historic event should be properly applied in our day, but every historic record, law, announcement, prophecy, judgment, and warning in the Bible is the very Word of God, and is not to be flinched at by anyone who calls himself by Christ’s name.

We must never doubt that whatever God did in the Old Testament era, the Second Person of the Trinity also did. God’s counsel and judgments are not divided. We must be careful not to regard Jesus Christ as a sort of “unindicted coconspirator” when we read the Old Testament. “For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels” (Mark 8:38).

My point here is simple. If we as Christians can accept what is a very hard principle of the Bible, that Christ was a blood sacrifice for our individual sins, then we shouldn’t flinch at accepting any of the rest of God’s principles. As we joyfully accepted His salvation, so we must joyfully embrace all of His principles that affect any and every area of our lives.

The Whole Bible

When, in a court of law, the witness puts his hand on the Bible and swears to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help him God, he thereby swears on the Word of God-the whole Word of God, and nothing but the Word of God. The Bible is a unit. It’s a “package deal.” The New Testament doesn’t overturn the Old Testament; it’s a commentary on the Old Testament. It tells us how to use the Old Testament properly in the period after the death and resurrection of Israel’s messiah, God’s Son.

Jesus said: “Do not think that l came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. l did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men to do so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:17-19). The Old Testament isn’t a discarded first draft of God’s Word. It isn’t “God’s Word emeritus.”

Dominion Christianity teaches that there are four covenants under God, meaning four kinds of vows under God: personal (individual), and the three institutional covenants: ecclesiastical (the church). civil (governments), and family. All other human institutions (business, educational, charitable, etc.) are to one degree or other under the jurisdiction of these four covenants. No single covenant is absolute; therefore, no single institution is all-powerful. Thus, Christian liberty is liberty under God and God’s law.

Christianity therefore teaches pluralism, but a very special kind of pluralism: plural institutions under God’s comprehensive law. it does not teach a pluralism of law structures, or a pluralism of moralities, for as we will see shortly, this sort of ultimate pluralism (as distinguished from institutional pluralism) is: always either polytheistic or humanistic. Christian people are required to take dominion over the earth by means of all these God-ordained institutions, not just the church, or just the state, or just the family. The kingdom of God includes every human institution, and every aspect of life, for all of life is under God and is governed by His unchanging principles. All of life is under God and God’s principles because God intends to judge all of life in terms of His principles.

In this structure of plural governments, the institutional churches serve as advisers to the other institutions (the Levitical function), but the churches can only pressure individual leaders through the threat of excommunication. As a restraining factor on unwarranted church authority, an unlawful excommunication by one local church or denomination is always subject to review by the others if and when the excommunicated person seeks membership elsewhere. Thus, each of the three covenantal institutions is to be run under God, as interpreted by its lawfully elected or ordained leaders, with the advice of the churches, not the compulsion.

Majority Rule

Just for the record, the authors aren’t in favor of imposing some sort of top-down bureaucratic tyranny in the name of Christ. The kingdom of God requires a bottom-up society. The bottom-up Christian society rests ultimately on the doctrine of self-government under God. It’s the humanist view of society that promotes top-down bureaucratic power.

The authors are in favor of evangelism and missions leading to a widespread Christian revival, so that the great mass of earth’s inhabitants will place themselves under Christ’s protection, and voluntarily use His covenantal principles for self-government. Christian reconstruction begins with personal conversion to Christ and sell-government under God’s principles, then spreads to others through revival, and only later brings comprehensive changes in civil law, when the vast majority of voters voluntarily agree to live under Biblical blueprints.

Let’s get this straight: Christian reconstruction depends on majority rule. Of course, the leaders of the Christian reconstructionist movement expect a majority eventually to accept Christ as savior. If this doesn’t happen, then Christians must be content with only partial reconstruction, and only partial blessings from God. It isn’t possible to ramrod God’s blessings from the top down, unless you’re God. Only humanists think that man is God. All we’re trying to do is get the ramrod away from them, and melt it down. The melted ramrod could then be used to make a great grave marker for humanism: “The God That Failed.”

The Continuing Heresy of Dualism

Many (of course, not all!) of the objections to the material in this book series will come from people who have a worldview that is very close to an ancient church problem: dualism. A lot of well-meaning Christian people are dualists, although they don’t even know what it is.

Dualism teaches that the world is inherently divided: spirit vs. matter, or law vs. mercy, or mind vs. matter, or nature vs. grace. What the Bible teaches is that this world is divided ethically and personally: Satan vs. God, right vs. wrong. The conflict between God and Satan will end at the final judgment. Whenever Christians substitute some other form of dualism for ethical dualism, they fall into heresy and suffer the consequences. That’s what has happened today. We are suffering from revived versions of ancient heresies.

Marcion’s Dualism

The Old Testament was written by the same God who wrote the New Testament. There were not two Gods in history, meaning there was no dualism or radical split between the two testamental periods. There is only one God, in time and eternity.

This idea has had opposition throughout church history. An ancient two-Gods heresy was first promoted, in the church about a century after Christ’s crucifixion, and the church has always regarded it as just that, a heresy. It was proposed by a man named Marcion. Basically, this heresy teaches that there are two completely different law systems in the Bible: Old Testament law and New Testament law (or non-law). But Marcion took the logic of his position all the way. He argued that two law systems means two Gods. The God of wrath wrote the Old Testament, and the God of mercy wrote the New Testament. In short: “two laws-two Gods.”

Many Christians still believe something dangerously close to Marcionism: not a two-Gods view, exactly, but a God-who-changed-all-His-rules sort of view. They begin with the accurate teaching that the ceremonial laws of the Old Testament were fulfilled by Christ, and therefore that the unchanging principles of Biblical worship are applied differently in the New Testament. But then they erroneously conclude that the whole Old Testament system of civil law was dropped by God, and nothing Biblical was put in its place. In other words, God created a sort of vacuum for state law.

This idea turns civil law-making over to Satan. In our day, this means that civil law-making is turned over to humanists. Christians have unwittingly become the philosophical allies of the humanists with respect to civil law. With respect to their doctrine of the state, therefore, most Christians hold what is in effect a two-Gods view of the Bible.

Gnosticism’s Dualism

Another ancient heresy that is still with us is gnosticism. It became a major threat to the early church almost from the beginning. It was also a form of dualism, a theory of a radical split. The gnostics taught that the split is between evil matter and good spirit. Thus, their goal was to escape this material world through other-worldly exercises that punish the body. They believed in retreat from the world of human conflicts and responsibility. Some of these ideas got into the church. And people started doing ridiculous things. One “saint” sat on a platform on top of a pole for several decades. This was considered very spiritual. (Who fed him? Who cleaned up after him?)

Thus, many Christians came to view “the world” as something permanently outside the kingdom of God. They believed that this hostile, forever-evil world cannot be redeemed, reformed, and reconstructed. Jesus didn’t really die for it, and it can’t be healed. At best, it can be subdued by power (maybe). This dualistic view of the world vs. God’s kingdom narrowly restricted any earthly manifestation of God’s kingdom. Christians who were influenced by gnosticism concluded that God’s kingdom refers only to the institutional church. They argued that the institutional church is the only manifestation of God’s kingdom.

This led to two opposite and equally evil conclusions. First, power religionists (“salvation through political power”) who accepted this definition of God’s kingdom tried to put the institutional church in charge of everything, since it is supposedly “the only manifestation of God’s kingdom on earth.” To subdue the supposedly unredeemable world, which is forever outside the kingdom, the institutional church has to rule with the sword. A single, monolithic institutional church then gives orders to the state, and the state must without question enforce these orders with the sword. The hierarchy of the institutional church concentrates political and economic power. What then becomes of liberty?

Second, escape religionists (“salvation is exclusively internal”) who also accepted this narrow definition of the kingdom sought refuge from the evil world of matter and politics by fleeing to hide inside the institutional church, an exclusively “spiritual kingdom,” now narrowly defined. They abandoned the world to evil tyrants. What then becomes of liberty? What becomes of the idea of God’s progressive restoration of all things under Jesus Christ? What, finally, becomes of the idea of Biblical dominion?

When Christians improperly narrow their definition of the kingdom of God, the visible influence of this comprehensive kingdom (both spiritual and institutional at the same time) begins to shrivel up. The first heresy leads to tyranny by the church, and the second heresy leads to tyranny over the church. Both of these narrow definitions of God’s kingdom destroy the liberty of the responsible Christian man, self-governed under God and God’s law.

Zoroaster’s Dualism

The last ancient pagan idea that still lives on is also a variant of dualism: matter vs. spirit. if teaches that God and Satan, good and evil, are forever locked in combat, and that good never triumphs over evil. The Persian religion of Zoroastrianism has held such a view for over 2,500 years. The incredibly popular “Star Wars” movies were based on this view of the world: the “dark” side of “the force” against its “light” side. In modern versions of this ancient dualism, the “force” is usually seen as itself impersonal: individuals personalize either the dark side or the light side by “plugging into” its power.

There are millions of Christians who have adopted a very pessimistic version of this dualism, though not in an impersonal form. God’s kingdom is battling Satan’s, and God’s is losing. History isn’t going to get better. In fact, things are going to get a lot worse externally. Evil will visibly push good into the shadows. The church is like a band of soldiers who are surrounded by a huge army of Indians. “We can’t win boys, so hold the fort until Jesus comes to rescue us!”

That doesn’t sound like Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Gideon, and David, does it? Christians read to their children one of the children’s favorite stories, David and Goliath, yet in their own lives, millions of Christian parents really think that the Goliaths of this world are the unbeatable earthly winners. Christians haven’t even picked up a stone. Until very recently.

An Agenda for Victory

The change has come since 1980. Many Christians’ thinking has shifted. Dualism, gnosticism, and “God changed His program midstream” ideas have begun to be challenged. The politicians have already begun to reckon with the consequences. Politicians are the people we pay to raise their wet index fingers in the wind to sense a shift, and they have sensed it. It scares them, too. It should.

A new vision has captured the imaginations of a growing army of registered voters. This new vision is simple: it’s the old vision of Genesis 1:27-28 and Matthew 28:19-20. It’s called dominion.

Four distinct ideas must be present in any ideology that expects to overturn the existing view of the world and the existing social order:

A doctrine of ultimate truth (permanence)
A doctrine of providence (confidence)
Optimism toward the future (motivation)
Binding comprehensive law (reconstruction)

The Marxists have had such a vision, or at least those Marxists who don’t live inside the bureaucratic giants called the Soviet Union and Red China. The radical (please, not “fundamentalist”) Muslims of Iran also have such a view.

Now, for the first time in over 300 years, Bible-believing Christians have rediscovered these four points in the theology of Christianity. For the first time in over 300 years, a growing number of Christians are starting to view themselves as an army on the move. This army will grow. This series is designed to help it grow. And grow tougher.

The authors of this series are determined to set the agenda in world affairs for the next few centuries. We know where the permanent answers are found: in the Bible, and only in the Bible. We believe that we have begun to discover at least preliminary answers to the key questions. There may be better answers, clearer answers, and more orthodox answers, but they must be found in the Bible, not at Harvard University or on the CBS Evening News.

We are self-consciously firing the opening shot. We are calling the whole Christian community to join with us in a very serious debate, just as Luther called them to debate him when he nailed the 95 theses to the church door, over four and a half centuries ago.

It is through such an exchange of ideas by those who take the Bible seriously that a nation and a civilization can be saved. There are now 5 billion people in the world. If we are to win our world (and these billions of souls) for Christ we must lift up the message of Christ by becoming the city on the hill. When the world sees the blessings by God upon a nation run by His principles, the mass conversion of whole nations to the Kingdom of our Lord will be the most incredible in of all history.

If we’re correct about the God-required nature of our agenda, it will attract a dedicated following. It will produce a social transformation that could dwarf the Reformation. This time, we’re not limiting our call for reformation to the institutional church.

This time, we mean business.

**Any footnotes in original have been omitted here. They can be found in the PDF link at the bottom of this page.

****************

Biblical Economics Today Vol. 9, No. 6 (October/November 1986)//www.garynorth.com/BET-Oct1986.PDF

For free PDFs of the original series, click here: //www.garynorth.com/public/14782.cfm

—<Quote ends>—

That’s the plan… or, more properly, a set of useful plans that can be modified as we go.

It would be nice if we were working now to build the future, rather than slacking around until after the Secularist Society has collapsed all around our ears.

But… people are lazy, and too often Christians live by sight, and not by faith – or even a reasonable chain of logic, grounded on evidence.

“If I don’t see it before my eyes tight now, I don’t care.”

(And these are the Christians I am talking about!)

Well, no matter. Joseph planned out what to do for both the days of plenty and the days of hunger. So should we.

For a more pointed indictment, I turn to North’s article Where Are the Blueprints for Reform?

—<Quote begins>—

Murray Rothbard complained that nobody in the West, especially in the free market segment of the academic community, proposed any kind of step-by-step transition out of Communism and into liberty. The breakup came without warning, and nobody had a written plan that could have been used by the new leaders of Russia to make the transition to a free market system.

The same was true of the reforms in China. They had taken place over a decade before the breakup of the Soviet Union. Yet even with this model in front of them, free-market economists who were employed by various nonprofit, tax-exempt think tanks did not come up with any kind of a workable blueprint for the transition out of Communism into a free market society.

I am not confident that such a blueprint would have worked. I assume that it would not have worked. History is too fluid. Blueprints are too formulaic. The blueprint that one guy proposes could be very different from the blueprint that somebody else proposes. So, blueprints don’t really work. But at least they testify to a specific motivation, namely, the desire to help the society that operates under tyranny to make the transition out of tyranny.

If you were to consult some embattled old-timer who has spent his life in the trenches defending a specific area of liberty against the encroachments of the federal government, he would no doubt tell you that the road to liberty must begin in his trench.

There has been almost nobody who has done yeoman service in the area of U.S. constitutional theory. We still do not have a comprehensive history of the transformation of constitutional law, including the political background of the major Supreme Court decisions. That book has been needed for a century, and nobody has even begun to think about it. How can you talk about reversing the expansion of the federal government in the United States, if you do not have a comprehensive understanding of how liberty was surrendered, case by case, by the United States Supreme Court? (I hope Tom Woods will write this book.)

Then there is somebody who has battled the public schools all of his life or all of her life. Where should we begin? The sellout on public education began in Massachusetts in the late 1830’s. The battle has always been to take control of the curriculum of the public schools, not to abolish them. Any time you see a reform movement that is based on the concept of reform rather than replacement, of capture rather than de-funding, you know the reform is not going to work. It starts with a false premise. Yet in the area of education, the handful of groups that might possibly have proposed a systematic alternative never developed a curriculum. I think of the Christian school movement. The curriculum materials are third rate, at best, and they are deeply compromised by the humanism of the Scottish Enlightenment and the American Revolution. At the college level, Christian education is a joke. It is basically a marital service. At the graduate school level, it does not exist. There is no such thing as a Christian college that has an explicitly Christian curriculum. The concept has never been attempted. There are some tiny Catholic schools that have integrated certain classic materials out of the Middle Ages, all based on Aquinas, but that compromise with Greek humanism is 1000 years old. That debate centered over whether we were going to be Aristotelian in the name of Jesus, or whether we were going to be Platonic. Bad choice.

We could talk about tax reform. There is no agreement. We could talk about monetary policy. There is no agreement. Even within the Austrian School, there is no agreement. Mises wanted free banking; Rothbard wanted 100% reserve banking. There is no way to reconcile these rival views.

So, there is not going to be a blueprint. In any case, who would use the blueprint? Where would be the foundation of a political reform with enough voters to elevate one blueprint over another?

The largest single voting bloc, which in fact is not a voting bloc, is the Christians. The Catholics don’t agree with the Protestants, and the Protestants don’t agree with each other. We can see the futility of this in the support of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. It was across the boards, in every denomination. The pastors supported the New Deal. The laymen supported the New Deal. There was no organized ecclesiastical opposition to any aspect of the New Deal. The only explicitly Christian opposition to the New Deal came from Father Coughlin, and he was an anti-Semitic promoter of greenbackism. That pretty much testified to the impotence, intellectually and morally, of the entire Christian church in the United States. It was simply “me, too” Christianity. It had nothing to say.

We need dozens of blueprints. We need blueprints from every opposition group. We need plans of action in every area. But we have almost none. Nobody has sat down, as far as I know, other than me, to put together a series of reform blueprints. That effort led nowhere 30 years ago. The large Christian publishing company that agreed to publish the series canceled after four volumes. A second company promised to do it, and then backed out. Christians don’t want trouble. Christian publishing houses don’t want trouble. But today, nobody needs Christian publishing houses. The Web has made an end run around them. They are now essentially irrelevant. They are supported by middle-aged women who buy mostly books on the concerns of mothers and grandmothers. The best-selling Christian books are written for this market, and they are generally written by televangelists. They are concerned with personal piety, not social reform. This has always been true. It is no less true today. Take a look.

It’s not that I think that the country could be saved by a blueprint. It’s that I don’t think the country will be ready for any significant change until there are a lot of competing blueprints out there, all on the assumption that the central governments of the West are going to wind up the way the Soviet Union wound up in the second half of 1991.

Americans cannot imagine the possibility that the federal government will go bankrupt. But the federal government is going to go bankrupt. If what is statistically inescapable does not register in the thinking of the overwhelming majority of Americans, then whatever changes are going to come out of the collapse of the solvency of the federal government are inherently unpredictable. They will be local. There will be no ideological consistency to them, county to county. The country is going to be turned into a series of local laboratories for social change.

Who is going to take care of old people? Who is going to take care of the poor? Who is going to fund the hospitals? Who is going to educate children? Who is going to clean the streets? Who is going to keep the highways in repair? Who is going to pick up the garbage? Who is going to provide the currency? Who is going to operate the public health systems? Who is going to spray mosquitoes in Florida? These are simple questions, but there are no simple answers. These are inescapable questions, but there are no systematic answers. We assume that the fiscal system is going to muddle through, but if we look at the unfunded liabilities of the federal government, we know that the system cannot possibly muddle through in its present form. So, the Congressional Budget Office has ceased to issue the statistics necessary to calculate the unfunded liabilities of the federal government. That is the CBO’s solution to the problem.

What we do know is this: there will be solutions offered, city by city, county by county, and state by state.

This is why the Great Default is going to create the most comprehensive, decentralized series of economic experimentations in the history of mankind. It is going to take place all over the West. The combination of central banking, old-age security, and subsidized health care is such that no Western nation can avoid the Great Default. The budget deficits point to what is going to happen. Nobody wants to look in the direction of where this is pointing. It is too disconcerting. We are therefore going to be blindsided, nation by nation, by the statistical reality of the unfunded liabilities.

The fact that there are no blueprints is not going to change the fact that, on an ad hoc basis, different communities are going to solve these problems in different ways. The important fact is this: the federal government is not going to be in the picture, because the federal government will not have the money sufficient to buy the cooperation of state and local politicians.

—<Quote ends>—

And now, the money quotes:

Murray Rothbard complained that nobody in the West, especially in the free market segment of the academic community, proposed any kind of step-by-step transition out of Communism and into liberty. […] I am not confident that such a blueprint would have worked. I assume that it would not have worked. History is too fluid. Blueprints are too formulaic. The blueprint that one guy proposes could be very different from the blueprint that somebody else proposes. So, blueprints don’t really work. But at least they testify to a specific motivation, namely, the desire to help the society that operates under tyranny to make the transition out of tyranny.

Plans and blueprints are good to make: not so much for their use or usefulness, but because they get us to think carefully and logically on the right road, in the right way.

Plans are disposable.
Planning is indispensable!”

So, there is not going to be a blueprint. In any case, who would use the blueprint? Where would be the foundation of a political reform with enough voters to elevate one blueprint over another?

The largest single voting bloc, which in fact is not a voting bloc, is the Christians. The Catholics don’t agree with the Protestants, and the Protestants don’t agree with each other. We can see the futility of this in the support of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. It was across the boards, in every denomination. The pastors supported the New Deal. The laymen supported the New Deal. There was no organized ecclesiastical opposition to any aspect of the New Deal. The only explicitly Christian opposition to the New Deal came from Father Coughlin, and he was an anti-Semitic promoter of greenbackism. That pretty much testified to the impotence, intellectually and morally, of the entire Christian church in the United States. It was simply “me, too” Christianity. It had nothing to say.

Worthless servants. Tasteless salt, fit only to be ground into the earth under the heels of sneering men.

Seeing how worthless, lawless, me-right-now driven, and delusional both priests experts and populations is, Christian worthlessness merely led to a worthless culture.

It’s time to stop fearing the hollow men, and get back to obeying God, and building His Kingdom.

It’s time to repent, and to start obeying God again, expanding His Kingdom on Earth again, to be tangy tasty salt again.

We need dozens of blueprints. We need blueprints from every opposition group. We need plans of action in every area. But we have almost none. Nobody has sat down, as far as I know, other than me, to put together a series of reform blueprints. That effort led nowhere 30 years ago. The large Christian publishing company that agreed to publish the series canceled after four volumes. A second company promised to do it, and then backed out. Christians don’t want trouble. Christian publishing houses don’t want trouble. But today, nobody needs Christian publishing houses. The Web has made an end run around them. They are now essentially irrelevant. They are supported by middle-aged women who buy mostly books on the concerns of mothers and grandmothers. The best-selling Christian books are written for this market, and they are generally written by televangelists. They are concerned with personal piety, not social reform. This has always been true. It is no less true today. Take a look.

This article was written in 2014.

Today, June 12, 2022 I can click that same link, and find — yes — books on personal piety. Also, Christian country romances, a Mormon theocracy, Allegro’s “The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross” — that old heretical chestnut! — and two works on Mere Christianity (including one work on the relationship between Dorothy and Jack).

Well, there’s one book of history, on the fall of Constantinople during the Forth Crusade: “The Great Betrayal” by Ernie Bradford. That’s not totally worthless, I hope, but the past is not what we should be focusing on. We need to build God’s Kingdom today, and expand it today, tomorrow, and forever.

(Note that I have no opposition to learning the strengths and weaknesses of Christian governments in the past, so we can learn from their mistakes and do far better. As we should.)

It’s not that I think that the country could be saved by a blueprint. It’s that I don’t think the country will be ready for any significant change until there are a lot of competing blueprints out there, all on the assumption that the central governments of the West are going to wind up the way the Soviet Union wound up in the second half of 1991.

Americans cannot imagine the possibility that the federal government will go bankrupt. But the federal government is going to go bankrupt. If what is statistically inescapable does not register in the thinking of the overwhelming majority of Americans, then whatever changes are going to come out of the collapse of the solvency of the federal government are inherently unpredictable. They will be local. There will be no ideological consistency to them, county to county. The country is going to be turned into a series of local laboratories for social change.

Who is going to take care of old people? Who is going to take care of the poor? Who is going to fund the hospitals? Who is going to educate children? Who is going to clean the streets? Who is going to keep the highways in repair? Who is going to pick up the garbage? Who is going to provide the currency? Who is going to operate the public health systems? Who is going to spray mosquitoes in Florida? These are simple questions, but there are no simple answers. These are inescapable questions, but there are no systematic answers. We assume that the fiscal system is going to muddle through, but if we look at the unfunded liabilities of the federal government, we know that the system cannot possibly muddle through in its present form. So, the Congressional Budget Office has ceased to issue the statistics necessary to calculate the unfunded liabilities of the federal government. That is the CBO’s solution to the problem.

Nobody believes that Pagan Rome will ever fall.

Even if it is an inevitability at this time: and not just due to the towering financial and demographic issues, too!

What we do know is this: there will be solutions offered, city by city, county by county, and state by state.

This is why the Great Default is going to create the most comprehensive, decentralized series of economic experimentations in the history of mankind. It is going to take place all over the West. The combination of central banking, old-age security, and subsidized health care is such that no Western nation can avoid the Great Default. The budget deficits point to what is going to happen. Nobody wants to look in the direction of where this is pointing. It is too disconcerting. We are therefore going to be blindsided, nation by nation, by the statistical reality of the unfunded liabilities.

The fact that there are no blueprints is not going to change the fact that, on an ad hoc basis, different communities are going to solve these problems in different ways. The important fact is this: the federal government is not going to be in the picture, because the federal government will not have the money sufficient to buy the cooperation of state and local politicians.

Nobody believes that this will happen: that the Empire will fall, that it will go bankrupt, that the Ruling Elite will be increasingly by past as the total irrelevance they are.

The God-hating rulers will become on earth what they already are in Heaven: powerless, unimportant, forgotten.

(As for what they will be in Hell, and then in the Lake of Fire?
Something we had better avoid!)

Christians had better get ready: not only by gaining knowledge, but by putting our knowledge into action, where we are.

In families, assembled before God, who loves Jesus — as proven by our obedience to His Commandments — and push for the expansion of His Kingdom.

Piety and Ritual is not the point.

Righteousness, Justice, Truth are the focus of God’s eyes, as is Love and Mercy for those who seek Mercy, Forgiveness for those who actually do repent of their sin.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.