| Thesis: Government oppression is not simply something that happens in other places. Nor is it merely the catch-phrase of whining political hucksters seeking to divide the US. This nation is already deeply and truly divided -- between citizens and unaccountable government employees. My own case provides anecdotal evidence. |
My claim to a biblical foundation is worthless if I don't start with God's Word. What follows assumes you have read the Bible enough to recognize the references without citation. If nothing else, take a look at the Prophet Amos.
Jesus referred often to the prophets during His ministry. Topics popular with prophets:
In the New Testament, Jesus did not condemn wealth, either. His only real demand for anyone to surrender his wealth was more about breaking the man from his materialism. Indeed, Jesus recognized one fact ignored by many today: Regardless how much you give to the needs of the poor, there will always be some of them around.
Economics is hardly a zero sum game. Everyone can prosper at the same time, just as everyone can suffer want. One need not take from others to gain; indeed, one usually gains significantly only by gainful free exchange. Throughout human history, the majority of amassed wealth was the result of relatively free exchange. Only in a few rare cases was a figure wealthy by oppressing others. Far and away, the vast majority of confiscation was the work of governments.
Even in the most prosperous and free times and places will see a group of individuals in want. It doesn't matter how they get that way; it's the nature of human existence. It cannot be avoided. If you force redistribution, you remove the incentive to prosper, and everyone sinks back to subsistence living. When the small class of productive folks prosper, it's not possible to avoid sharing. Luxury cannot be kept inside the pocket. You get comfort by paying for it, by exchanging, because no one human can individually produce all they could ever want. No one is powerful enough to individually take all they could want. They have to hire someone, and those someones will spend their wages, and the wealth will be spread around. The few individuals so obsessed with having they couldn't bear to spend wealth on luxury are rare enough to be remarkable.
Still, this world does not produce enough wealth for everyone to live in luxury. Indeed, the very concept of luxury is relative to circumstances and perception. If you are happy, feeling fully indulged, you live in luxury, regardless of your relative economic situation. If you are miserable, you might still be in luxury if you are at the top of the economic food chain. It depends on what you're getting at when you use the word. Just the same, the concept of poverty is also relative.
When He said, "the poor you always have with you," Jesus was referring not to an economic situation, but a condition relative to God's provision. No matter how bad you've got it, someone else is always worse off. The Mosaic Law about alms-giving reflected God's wish His people be generous, just as He was. Your bucket of blessing -- never mind material wealth, or lack of it -- can't be refilled if you aren't the sort of person who keeps pouring it out on others. Blessing by its nature is distributive, and channeling it is part of being blessed.
The prophetic denouncements against leaders was not about the natural processes of ruling including taxes. If one worked for a living, one had no time to rule. The very essence of ruling was about pastoring the people; David as shepherd was the quintessential image of God's king over the people. When things were rough (#1 above), you needed a leader who would react appropriately. Not just exercising the authority to gather an army and command in battle, but moving at the urging of God, and in faith He would deliver. At every point, when the requirements from God weren't obvious, David and his kind sought a Word from God. That they would ask folks to support the soldiers by sharing their harvest bounty was assumed, even by the folks gathering the harvest.
The times when kings got into trouble were times of peace and prosperity. They kept pulling in higher war-time tax rates when they should have backed off. The one extravagant public works project which got no one in trouble was the Temple. It served as a means to focus the attention of the nation on God. Building defensive forts was okay, but not at such high expense it hurt. When there's no problem, there's not much need for a king. Only if the people sin is there a need to get rough on them when there is no external foe. That's because the foe is within. A righteous nation deserved its good fortune.
In the meantime, it was expected when operating on a large scale there would be occasional mistakes. If it was necessary to judge between private citizens, all the more so between citizens and servants of the king. Life in a fallen world is pretty rough at the best of times. Wise leaders prepare for valid complaints and claims for compensation. Simple miscalculations are unavoidable. Anger was expected in such cases, but open hatred was not tolerated -- unless there was clear malfeasance. Someone faithful of heart, but incompetent, might still be kept on in some limited capacity. Someone with bad motives in the king's service was a great liability. A good shepherd knew the difference between a sheep and a wolf. Naturally, prophets condemned the wolves. Still, rams could stumble and gore someone by accident, and shepherds could miss some threat, because they only had two eyes.
By this standard, I submit to you a case of wolves playing as shepherds. This is not about rejecting government, but about sin in the institution of government. There is nothing remarkable about that in itself. The modern State is a far cry from the personal rule of one accountable before God. By pretending there is an impersonal governing institution answerable to the people at large, we have gained a coterie of rulers effectively answerable to no one at all. I am hardly anti-government; I am anti-state. Democracy has been elevated to a place of civic reverence, but it is a failed god. It guarantees a semblance of accountability -- "Vote the bums out!" -- while it also guarantees a class of untouchable bureaucrats, because we just can't have every functionary office filled by political appointees. And to be fair, they must be able to form and join unions, which care only about the employee and his contributions to the union fund, while caring nothing about the citizens the bureaucrat is alleged to serve. There is no check on them, and they easily toss aside the conscience we all must have for democracy to have an ice cube's chance in Hell.
The case: bureaucrats with badges bullying someone who dared make a claim against their bungling. Their bullying includes destroying one ministry, and working to prevent any other ministries from taking hold. Just recently, they've been popping up in my world again.
About six years ago, my life was disturbed by an usual event. I have a close friend who often seeks me out for discussions of Bible history and theology. After I moved several hundred miles away from where we met and became friends, we continued these discussions via telephone. This man owns a drug store, and is prosperous enough to send me money on occasions, out of gratitude for my teaching ministry.
At about the same time that I moved away, this man's elder brother, also a business associate, was caught up in a sting operation. It seems he had been selling illegal quantities of certain substances to those who used them for illegal methamphetamine production. While out on bond, the man fled, and basically disappeared (wanted poster).
While neither my friend nor I would be willing support this man's lawless behavior in any way, it was natural for the federal law enforcement authorities investigating to see if we had anything to do with his disappearance. They tapped my friend's phone and monitored our frequent long phone calls. The Federal Marshals came out to the rural property where I lived at the time to see how likely it was I was hiding their fugitive. They asked questions around town near where I lived to see if anybody thought I was the kind of man who might harbor folks running from the law.
Notice the juxtaposition of events: The man was arrested 12 June 1999, and fled from justice a short time later. I moved to a rural Texas "hideaway" less than a month after the arrest, keeping contact with the fugitive's brother. They spent the morning asking questions around the town, then came out to see me that afternoon. Little did I know, they had not conducted themselves with professionalism and integrity during their investigation.
About the time the Marshals appeared, I had just begun establishing enough credibility with the local Baptist church to be considered for a staff position. Many of the church members were major figures in the town, running businesses and such. These marshals came into town and began asking around who knew me. Their questions were presented so as to be remembered something like: "We know this guy is hiding our fugitive, we just want you to help us prove he's that kind of fellow." I didn't know it at the time, so when they came out to see me, I was quite friendly with them. They were convinced, and went away on good terms -- or so I thought.
For the next six months I battled a sudden resistance to my efforts to serve. The church had welcomed me with open arms previously, glad I was there. Suddenly they backed off, and kept me at arm's length. Finally, I asked the pastor what I was doing wrong. He told me how the Marshals had conducted their interviews in town, how they had defamed me by the slant of their queries. He also told me the deacons had met and discussed the situation, very nearly kicking me out that day. I was stunned. While I had the pastor's support, most of the deacons still didn't trust me. After a few more months, it was clear I couldn't do anything useful there, so I left.
I felt dirty, betrayed by the very government to which I was then still deeply loyal. Willingly I had struggled to return to military service after accepting a hardship discharge in 1982. Even though it meant going back through Basic Training again, I pressed ahead with the pile of paperwork to join the Army again in 1988. I was so very proud when the primary offer was to become a Military Policeman. I didn't realize I was even eligible for that rather elite specialty. While serving in Europe, I managed to qualify for the DARE Program. In case you missed it, that was a big deal in the late `80s and through the `90s: police officers trained to enter the school system and explain to students strategies for avoiding involvement in drug abuse. We were deeply motivated teachers, having been there to clean up after so many cases where drugs had destroyed lives. Never mind the lousy psychology behind the DARE Program -- I was very proud of my three years in that effort. I was the last person who would hide a pharmacist who abused his position to enable illegal methamphetamine labs.
I wrote to the Inspector General for the US Marshals, complaining of this conduct. I got a terse answer they would look into it. That was the last I heard for a long time. I thought it was over, but wrote an article and made some effort to publish it on the Internet. Were it not for this raw deal, I might not have ever given thought to such things. Instead, my research, combined with my previous experience as a Military Policemen and half-forgotten facts, pointed to a consistent strain of federal police misconduct. My analysis indicates it is a firm training doctrine affecting all law enforcement officers in the US, federal, state and local: the State is god. When you wear the badge of the State, you can do no wrong.
My weblog saw quite a few rantings about it. Apparently they noticed. Just about a year ago, they revisited the case, going back over the various leads. They went to see my friend at his drug store, first harassing him, then trying to sucker him into believing they were his friends. With nothing to hide, he reaffirmed his friendship with me was all about faith. He told them of our Christian fellowship, a fellowship which included his hosting Bible studies in his workplace after hours with a group of men ten years ago. The Marshals paid a visit to as many of those men as they could find. In the process, they showed themselves consistent. In each case, they portrayed me to these men as a "shaved-head cult leader."
Either they've had me under surveillance for quite some time, or they at least read my weblog, for it included a picture of me with my head shaved. However, I've never been leader of much of anything. When I left that little church in the town where I was slandered, I went to a small country church 25 miles away and was hired as Music Director. I have yet to lead anymore private Bible studies in the past decade, and don't even have a following on the Internet. It's quite a stretch to call me a cult leader.
While the men from our study group laughed them off, it's easy to see the Marshals are not going to forget. Neither will I. My position is, they could have stopped this in the first place by simply apologizing. Apparently that's forbidden even in the face of a court order, and others apologize for them. I'm waiting to forgive, but the Lord requires repentance to claim forgiveness. Repentance means turning around, changing one's ways. I don't believe I'm given to paranoia, but I have to wonder if any of my inexplicable misfortunes over the past few years is their handiwork. I suppose it's because I dared to squawk, but I'm not looking over my shoulder. Still, you have to keep in mind, this is the same people who:
I keep wondering what they'll do to me next.
Update: Apparently the US Marshals are still referring to me as a cult leader. Shortly before the original article was published, unknown to me, was another incident. In October 2005, the Marshals visited the fugitive's ex-wife. I suppose it was because she had tried to have him declared dead so she could clear up some pending property issues he left hanging when he fled in 1999.
At any rate, during their visit with her, they asked if she knew who I was. She had never heard my name before, so they told her I was some cult leader down in rural Texas, even though I had left Texas just ahead of Hurricane Rita in the previous month. They explained to her how they were sure they could infiltrate my alleged cult group, but there was no point in it, because I was expert at hiding people.
So, serving as the Music Director of a tiny Baptist church near my rural home somehow made me a cult leader. I wasn't even the pastor. Most of my time was divided between mowing and caring for the church facility, helping a church member with a mesquite infestation, and learning about Linux and BSD. No secret meetings, nothing like enough income to support anyone beside my wife and I, and very public about my writings and teaching.
I suppose they had tapered off the close surveillance sometime during the previous year. They are still vindictive and slandering me, but there's been no need to watch so closely. All the more so, considering at least one of their agents is a fellow member of the same large Baptist church I attend at the time of this update.
Ed Hurst
28 November 2005, updated 04 August 2006
COPYRIGHT NOTICE: People of honor need no copyright laws; they are only too happy to give credit where credit is due. Others will ignore copyright laws whenever they please. If you are of the latter, please note what Moses said about dishonorable behavior -- "be sure your sin will find you out" (Numbers 32:23)