“It is no coincidence that the century of total war coincided with the century of central banking.”
So said Ron Paul, a humble man, great role model, honoured American elder statesman and honest thinker.
His quote goes a long way in explaining why we need to “repeal the 20th century”, as Murray Rothbard and Gary North have said. Along with central banks, of course.
“We shall repeal the 20th century.” These were words spoken by American economist Murray N. Rothbard (1926 – 1995) near the end of an article he wrote in 1992. Another American economist, Gary North (b. 1942), who is a historian and theologian as well, used these words near the end of a lecture he gave in 2010.
Rothbard made clear why he wants to repeal it, when he asked, ironically:
“Who would want to repeal the 20th century, the century of horror, the century of collectivism, the century of mass destruction and genocide, who would want to repeal that! Well, we propose to do just that.”
With “we” he meant what he hoped would be a resurrected movement which in America is called the Old Right, a movement that was libertarian in its core, supported decentralised structures, laissez-faire economics and minimal interference of the government into private lives. This movement was effectively killed off around the year 1900 and replaced by interventionist, imperialist, big-government and big-business supporting politics.
Similar things had happened, or were happening, in Europe. Nationalism was the name of the game, and that sentiment lead to centralised governments continually increasing their interventions into the economy to suit their lust for power. Imperialism was the natural outgrowth of this development. This in turn lead to the original catastrophe of our time, World War One.
Considering that we are by now one fifth into the next century, it is clear that we have been unable to repeal the 20th century. For, as an idea, or phenomenon, the 20th century, in all its awfulness, is still firmly with us. So, how can we go about “repealing” it?
Continue readingChristian theologian, historian and economist Dr. Gary North (b. 1942) has something to say on this subject.
In a written introduction to a lecture he gave in 2010 on the history of American conservatism, he says:
“A movement without optimism regarding the earthly future of its adherents suffers from a disadvantage in recruiting, training, and financing evangelists who will sacrifice time and money in order to bring its message to the public.”
In this instance he meant, specifically, conservatism. But he might just as well have referred to Christianity – certainly in western countries.
That North in fact does think this also with regard to most of Christianity today becomes clear when reading these words from the introduction to his book “Christian Economics, Vol. 3: Activist’s Edition“:
“The vast majority of Christians have adopted an eschatology—the doctrine of last things—that insists that the world cannot be reformed. Yes, an individual can use the Bible to reform himself with God’s help. Of course, Christian families can be reformed by biblical principles. Even churches can be reformed or else replaced by better ones. But society cannot be successfully reformed. Neither can the state. In contrast, another group of Christians, few in number in the past, insist that Christ’s redemption is comprehensive. Wherever sin reigns, Christ’s kingdom can reform it. Therefore, the Bible offers answers to every question, including this one: “How should this area of life be reformed?” This is the issue of healing. The concept of healing is related to salvation. A salve heals.”
North continues:
“I am in the second group. I am inviting you to join.”
His books on Christian economics are his “program of reform”.
I agree with North. When I advocate “progress with God”, I am thinking of North’s ideas for “reforming” or “healing” society.
Today’s “progressives” also talk a lot about “reforming” or “healing” society. Their intentions in that respect are what make their movement so attractive — and powerful. Their particular intentions may be laudable. But without God, they will not heal society. On the contrary, their attempts at healing society without listening to God are very likely to make things worse for society and its individuals.