/u/Jooseman
Inspired by Letters to a Germany Friend by Albert Camus, I decided to write an introduction to Mormon Anarchism in the form of a series of letters. This is the first of those letters, introducing the idea of why the Church needs a form of left wing radicalism, as it has throughout its history. Further letters will go into more detail on topics such as Liberty, Property Ownership, etc.
First Letter
I remember being told, not once, but many a time, that I cannot be on the Left and belong to this religion, and whenever I have tried to argue about the Churches own left-wing radical past, I have been met with shoddy arguments and silence. Because of this, I have kept my silence; I have lived a lie, professing a conservative attitude when required, even to you, but never believing. I can no longer live like this, the folk-conservative attitude that plagues the church is killing it, and I must speak out.
I must first say however, to calm any concerns, this isn’t an attack on the truthfulness of the Church. I fully believe in the church, and sustain that God has chosen the Prophet, the Apostles, and all such General Authorities. This however, contrary to some strange popular belief, does not make these men infallible. It is official Church policy to stay out of Politics, saying, in an official message from the first presidency in 1903 that it “does not attempt to exercise the powers of a secular government, but its influence and effects are to strengthen and promote fidelity to the law and loyalty to the nation where its followers reside ... The Church does not dictate a member’s business, his politics or his personal affairs. It never tells a citizen what occupation he shall follow, whom he shall vote for or with which party he shall affiliate...” Of course, we know this not to be true, the Church constantly, wrongly forsakes its own guideless and gets involved in Politics to push a Conservative agenda, but this idea exists in theory anyway.
Is it not the desire of each of us, and every member of the Church, to help build Zion? Not when Jesus returns, but now, to protect us from the evils of the world, the poverty and the inequality? So surely, while you support the Mitt Romneys of this world, politics to benefit the rich, we work to build an equal Zion. Us radical Mormons, no matter how small we are, will win in the end. When Zion is built, it won’t be due to your businesses and Capitalism, the Babylons of this world, whose towers shall be overthrown
.
But what would Zion look like; I think the best way to see this is outside of the Mormon Church, in the English hymn, Jerusalem:
And did those feet in ancient time
Walk upon England's mountains green:
And was the holy Lamb of God,
On England's pleasant pastures seen!
And did the Countenance Divine,
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here,
Among these dark Satanic Mills?
Bring me my Bow of burning gold;
Bring me my Arrows of desire:
Bring me my Spear: O clouds unfold!
Bring me my Chariot of fire!
I will not cease from Mental Fight,
Nor shall my Sword sleep in my hand:
Till we have built Jerusalem,
In England's green & pleasant Land
The hymn talks of the need to build Jerusalem, our Zion, upon England’s green & pleasant land, which is in line with the Churches desire for us to build Zion in the countries in which we reside. It questions would Jesus want his kingdom built in a land, destroyed by dark satanic mills, constructs of Capitalism? Of course he wouldn’t, and this applies to all constructs of Capitalism, the banks, and all other such forms. This isn’t the sort of destruction, inequality, and slavery that Jesus would have us build.
This entire history of this Church has been revolutionary, where did this go? When did we give up on the idea of revolution? The idea of rallying against Capitalism and its inequalities, supporting the right for people to revolt, in order to bring about the utopia we strive for. Our Zion. All one needs to do is look at the first French convert to Mormonism to believe this: Louis A. Bertrand, the revolutionary and political editor of the Communist paper Le Populaire. He preached Mormonism and Utopianism to the masses, isn’t this what we should strive to be like?
Yet the Church has been assimilated into American culture, and as can be seen, it is starting to assimilate the rest of the world as well. Gone are the days when Church Presidents could announce that they defy the United States; General Authorities would talk in support of the proletariat, giving them a voice; and Missionaries would preach not only the Gospel, but preach the idea of revolt to the lower classes, so that they could gain themselves a voice.
But surely it is impossible to preach the authentic Gospel, while at the same time not preaching revolutionary ideas to the lower classes? The idea of Christianity is that every one of us has access to the Holy Spirit, a universality that makes each one of us equal. In Christianity, there are neither men nor women, Jews nor Greeks; we are all equal in our Saviour, Jesus Christ.
Why has this assimilation happened though? It seems that ever since the 1890’s, after the Church had given up Polygamy and the ideas of forming collectivist economic societies. It has been on a path to becoming as American as Apple Pie. Mormonism had to assimilate to destruction by their host culture, and instead they risk destruction by assimilation, transforming themselves into patriotic citizens. And to finish the conversion into becoming such a bastion of Capitalism, the Church itself became a Corporation. No longer can the Saviour remove the moneychangers from the Temples, because the moneychangers own the Temples.
So what is the alternative to world at the moment? I will pre-empt you quoting President Ezra Taft Benson, who before he became President of the Church was a member of a far right conspiracy organisation, the John Birch Society, and constantly brought anti-communism into the Church, in the fervour of McCarthyism and the Red Scare that was happening at the time. He used the same tired clichés of the misunderstanding of far left politics that started in this scare, and have continues until the present day. Of course his preaching, as well as those of other General Authorities, has left such a lasting influence of folk-doctrine on members of the Church, that Communism, as it is in the majority of America, has become a sullied word, a disgust to those who see themselves as hard working Americans.
I will get one of the “alternatives” out of the way quickly, because not only is it not really an alternative, the idea of it disgusts me. While you may find a lack of Left Mormon Radicals in the Church, you press certain members hard enough you can certainly will find radical right wing groups, your American style libertarians, Anarcho-Capitalists and the like, many of whom are the darlings of many an average Churchgoer, championed by the views of members such as the infamous painter Jon McNaughton, who combines in a tasteless manner, religious, political and (bad) historical themes, in paintings that, ironically, are reminiscent of those from the Soviet Realist movement in Stalinist Russia. This group also includes anti-communist and conspiracy theorist, Cleon Skousen, a man who at the time, while being recommended from the Pulpit by Church authorities, was also being accused of teaching ideas perilously close to Nazism. Likewise, Skousens almost protégé, Glenn Beck, falls into this group. The biggest name within the church, was the former Church President, Ezra Taft Benson; though once he became President he toned down the rhetoric. The world of right wing Libertarians and Anarcho-Capitalists is a disgusting, hateful one. How can anyone imagine it would be possible to build Zion, when they won’t even build anything that won’t serve them, or make them money? Imagine a Zion like that, maybe they can charge you for visits to Christ as well?
We do not need to look far for an alternative though; we just need to look at the Scriptures and church history, where we have the United Order. The United Order is somewhat reminiscent of the modern Kibbutz movement in Israel, though of course the Kibbutz has many problems of its own. Whenever you even try to mention United Order and the Left in the same sentence though, you are suddenly jumped by rabid Church apologists, huffing and puffing that the United Order couldn’t be left wing, and the bogeyman of Mormonism, (insert scare quotes) Communism. They say this because of some strange belief that because it’s religiously based, it cannot be left wing, because Marx spoke out against religion, and because they had freedom of choice. Thus they call Communism the Devil’s version of the United Order.
I think the reasons they refuse to call the United Order left wing, apart from the fact that in general, the Church is the cliché of a model American citizen stuck in the 1950’s, as shown by the door-to-door salesmen Missionaries, are a good indicator of why Mormons speak out against the Left Wing. They have this straw man of a Socialist. Someone who denies religious rights, and leads them to a dictatorship, that removes the main thing that our Heavenly Father has given us: our agency.
Does socialism have to lead to these things though? Of course it doesn’t, there are many other ways to achieve Socialism without Marxism (though I do not deny you can be Marxist and religious, while his philosophy is anti-religion, I am sure you incorporate his other theories, I personally cannot stand it), and it seems that the best way would be through the sort of Christian Anarchism advocated by Leo Tolstoy. The idea of a dictatorship of the proletariat, advocated by Marxism, to me is detestable. Yes that would reach the same end goal as us, but what we lose at the same time is our freedom, our agency, instead of being a dictatorship of the proletariat, and instead everything is controlled by what Bakunin warned of, a “Red bureaucracy.” Instead of being wage slaves to large corporations, suddenly instead they are wage slaves to the state.
To quote Tolstoy:
““The capitalistic organization will pass into the hands of workers, and then there will be no more oppression of these workers, and no unequal distribution of earnings.”[Marxist]
“But who will establish the works; who will administer them?” [Anarchist]
“It will go on of its own accord; the workmen themselves will arrange everything.”[Marxist]
“But the capitalistic organization was established just because, for every practical affair, there is need for administrators furnished with power. If there be work, there will be leadership, administrators with power. And when there is power, there will be abuse of it — the very thing against which you are now striving.” [Anarchist]”
The main point of Anarchism is liberty, and liberty is both the leading ideal in Mormonism. The problem with both Capitalism and Communism is that it leads to a curtailing of this liberty by a state. Following a state will inevitably lead to an abuse of some form of power and ruin, but nothing bad can come from truly following the guidance of Christ.
A major concern with people about Anarchism is that they believe it removes our agency, by not being allowed to own property. As Proudhon, the Anarchist said, “Property is theft”, this might come as a massive shock to the Mormon, the personification of the model American, however surely this just echoes similar thoughts to something Brigham Young once said, “There shall be no private ownership of the streams that come out of the canyons, nor the timber that grows on the hills. These belong to the people: all the people.”
This sounds incredibly like a form of Anarcho-Syndicalism, we’re not talking about not being able to own things such as cars, and other commodities, we’re talking about factories and other means of production being owned by the workers, instead of privately owned, as in a Capitalist society, where the owners steal the work of the workers, and rob them of their labour. The workers, owning a factory as a collective, instead can use the property for the common benefit of the society.
This concept, that the world should be controlled by the wealth of the earth should be controlled by the people and worked and distributed by the people is the economic system that is talked about in the Scripture. Yet in revelation, Joseph Smith said "It is not given that one man should possess that which is above another, wherefore the world lieth in sin" (D&C 49:20), because “If you are not equal in earthly things ye cannot be equal in obtaining heavenly things” (D&C 78:5-6).
The narrative, set about by our Heavenly Father, through revelation to Joseph Smith, speaks clearly of rejecting riches, and instead to care for the poor and needy. You must heed the warning of Samuel the Lamanite, “The day shall come when they shall hide up their treasures, because they have set their hearts upon riches; cursed be they and also their treasures.”
09/17/2015
Inspired by Letters to a Germany Friend by Albert Camus, I decided to write an introduction to Mormon Anarchism in the form of a series of letters. This is the first of those letters, introducing the idea of why the Church needs a form of left wing radicalism, as it has throughout its history. Further letters will go into more detail on topics such as Liberty, Property Ownership, etc.
First Letter
I remember being told, not once, but many a time, that I cannot be on the Left and belong to this religion, and whenever I have tried to argue about the Churches own left-wing radical past, I have been met with shoddy arguments and silence. Because of this, I have kept my silence; I have lived a lie, professing a conservative attitude when required, even to you, but never believing. I can no longer live like this, the folk-conservative attitude that plagues the church is killing it, and I must speak out.
I must first say however, to calm any concerns, this isn’t an attack on the truthfulness of the Church. I fully believe in the church, and sustain that God has chosen the Prophet, the Apostles, and all such General Authorities. This however, contrary to some strange popular belief, does not make these men infallible. It is official Church policy to stay out of Politics, saying, in an official message from the first presidency in 1903 that it “does not attempt to exercise the powers of a secular government, but its influence and effects are to strengthen and promote fidelity to the law and loyalty to the nation where its followers reside ... The Church does not dictate a member’s business, his politics or his personal affairs. It never tells a citizen what occupation he shall follow, whom he shall vote for or with which party he shall affiliate...” Of course, we know this not to be true, the Church constantly, wrongly forsakes its own guideless and gets involved in Politics to push a Conservative agenda, but this idea exists in theory anyway.
Is it not the desire of each of us, and every member of the Church, to help build Zion? Not when Jesus returns, but now, to protect us from the evils of the world, the poverty and the inequality? So surely, while you support the Mitt Romneys of this world, politics to benefit the rich, we work to build an equal Zion. Us radical Mormons, no matter how small we are, will win in the end. When Zion is built, it won’t be due to your businesses and Capitalism, the Babylons of this world, whose towers shall be overthrown
.
But what would Zion look like; I think the best way to see this is outside of the Mormon Church, in the English hymn, Jerusalem:
And did those feet in ancient time
Walk upon England's mountains green:
And was the holy Lamb of God,
On England's pleasant pastures seen!
And did the Countenance Divine,
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here,
Among these dark Satanic Mills?
Bring me my Bow of burning gold;
Bring me my Arrows of desire:
Bring me my Spear: O clouds unfold!
Bring me my Chariot of fire!
I will not cease from Mental Fight,
Nor shall my Sword sleep in my hand:
Till we have built Jerusalem,
In England's green & pleasant Land
The hymn talks of the need to build Jerusalem, our Zion, upon England’s green & pleasant land, which is in line with the Churches desire for us to build Zion in the countries in which we reside. It questions would Jesus want his kingdom built in a land, destroyed by dark satanic mills, constructs of Capitalism? Of course he wouldn’t, and this applies to all constructs of Capitalism, the banks, and all other such forms. This isn’t the sort of destruction, inequality, and slavery that Jesus would have us build.
This entire history of this Church has been revolutionary, where did this go? When did we give up on the idea of revolution? The idea of rallying against Capitalism and its inequalities, supporting the right for people to revolt, in order to bring about the utopia we strive for. Our Zion. All one needs to do is look at the first French convert to Mormonism to believe this: Louis A. Bertrand, the revolutionary and political editor of the Communist paper Le Populaire. He preached Mormonism and Utopianism to the masses, isn’t this what we should strive to be like?
Yet the Church has been assimilated into American culture, and as can be seen, it is starting to assimilate the rest of the world as well. Gone are the days when Church Presidents could announce that they defy the United States; General Authorities would talk in support of the proletariat, giving them a voice; and Missionaries would preach not only the Gospel, but preach the idea of revolt to the lower classes, so that they could gain themselves a voice.
But surely it is impossible to preach the authentic Gospel, while at the same time not preaching revolutionary ideas to the lower classes? The idea of Christianity is that every one of us has access to the Holy Spirit, a universality that makes each one of us equal. In Christianity, there are neither men nor women, Jews nor Greeks; we are all equal in our Saviour, Jesus Christ.
Why has this assimilation happened though? It seems that ever since the 1890’s, after the Church had given up Polygamy and the ideas of forming collectivist economic societies. It has been on a path to becoming as American as Apple Pie. Mormonism had to assimilate to destruction by their host culture, and instead they risk destruction by assimilation, transforming themselves into patriotic citizens. And to finish the conversion into becoming such a bastion of Capitalism, the Church itself became a Corporation. No longer can the Saviour remove the moneychangers from the Temples, because the moneychangers own the Temples.
So what is the alternative to world at the moment? I will pre-empt you quoting President Ezra Taft Benson, who before he became President of the Church was a member of a far right conspiracy organisation, the John Birch Society, and constantly brought anti-communism into the Church, in the fervour of McCarthyism and the Red Scare that was happening at the time. He used the same tired clichés of the misunderstanding of far left politics that started in this scare, and have continues until the present day. Of course his preaching, as well as those of other General Authorities, has left such a lasting influence of folk-doctrine on members of the Church, that Communism, as it is in the majority of America, has become a sullied word, a disgust to those who see themselves as hard working Americans.
I will get one of the “alternatives” out of the way quickly, because not only is it not really an alternative, the idea of it disgusts me. While you may find a lack of Left Mormon Radicals in the Church, you press certain members hard enough you can certainly will find radical right wing groups, your American style libertarians, Anarcho-Capitalists and the like, many of whom are the darlings of many an average Churchgoer, championed by the views of members such as the infamous painter Jon McNaughton, who combines in a tasteless manner, religious, political and (bad) historical themes, in paintings that, ironically, are reminiscent of those from the Soviet Realist movement in Stalinist Russia. This group also includes anti-communist and conspiracy theorist, Cleon Skousen, a man who at the time, while being recommended from the Pulpit by Church authorities, was also being accused of teaching ideas perilously close to Nazism. Likewise, Skousens almost protégé, Glenn Beck, falls into this group. The biggest name within the church, was the former Church President, Ezra Taft Benson; though once he became President he toned down the rhetoric. The world of right wing Libertarians and Anarcho-Capitalists is a disgusting, hateful one. How can anyone imagine it would be possible to build Zion, when they won’t even build anything that won’t serve them, or make them money? Imagine a Zion like that, maybe they can charge you for visits to Christ as well?
We do not need to look far for an alternative though; we just need to look at the Scriptures and church history, where we have the United Order. The United Order is somewhat reminiscent of the modern Kibbutz movement in Israel, though of course the Kibbutz has many problems of its own. Whenever you even try to mention United Order and the Left in the same sentence though, you are suddenly jumped by rabid Church apologists, huffing and puffing that the United Order couldn’t be left wing, and the bogeyman of Mormonism, (insert scare quotes) Communism. They say this because of some strange belief that because it’s religiously based, it cannot be left wing, because Marx spoke out against religion, and because they had freedom of choice. Thus they call Communism the Devil’s version of the United Order.
I think the reasons they refuse to call the United Order left wing, apart from the fact that in general, the Church is the cliché of a model American citizen stuck in the 1950’s, as shown by the door-to-door salesmen Missionaries, are a good indicator of why Mormons speak out against the Left Wing. They have this straw man of a Socialist. Someone who denies religious rights, and leads them to a dictatorship, that removes the main thing that our Heavenly Father has given us: our agency.
Does socialism have to lead to these things though? Of course it doesn’t, there are many other ways to achieve Socialism without Marxism (though I do not deny you can be Marxist and religious, while his philosophy is anti-religion, I am sure you incorporate his other theories, I personally cannot stand it), and it seems that the best way would be through the sort of Christian Anarchism advocated by Leo Tolstoy. The idea of a dictatorship of the proletariat, advocated by Marxism, to me is detestable. Yes that would reach the same end goal as us, but what we lose at the same time is our freedom, our agency, instead of being a dictatorship of the proletariat, and instead everything is controlled by what Bakunin warned of, a “Red bureaucracy.” Instead of being wage slaves to large corporations, suddenly instead they are wage slaves to the state.
To quote Tolstoy:
““The capitalistic organization will pass into the hands of workers, and then there will be no more oppression of these workers, and no unequal distribution of earnings.”[Marxist]
“But who will establish the works; who will administer them?” [Anarchist]
“It will go on of its own accord; the workmen themselves will arrange everything.”[Marxist]
“But the capitalistic organization was established just because, for every practical affair, there is need for administrators furnished with power. If there be work, there will be leadership, administrators with power. And when there is power, there will be abuse of it — the very thing against which you are now striving.” [Anarchist]”
The main point of Anarchism is liberty, and liberty is both the leading ideal in Mormonism. The problem with both Capitalism and Communism is that it leads to a curtailing of this liberty by a state. Following a state will inevitably lead to an abuse of some form of power and ruin, but nothing bad can come from truly following the guidance of Christ.
A major concern with people about Anarchism is that they believe it removes our agency, by not being allowed to own property. As Proudhon, the Anarchist said, “Property is theft”, this might come as a massive shock to the Mormon, the personification of the model American, however surely this just echoes similar thoughts to something Brigham Young once said, “There shall be no private ownership of the streams that come out of the canyons, nor the timber that grows on the hills. These belong to the people: all the people.”
This sounds incredibly like a form of Anarcho-Syndicalism, we’re not talking about not being able to own things such as cars, and other commodities, we’re talking about factories and other means of production being owned by the workers, instead of privately owned, as in a Capitalist society, where the owners steal the work of the workers, and rob them of their labour. The workers, owning a factory as a collective, instead can use the property for the common benefit of the society.
This concept, that the world should be controlled by the wealth of the earth should be controlled by the people and worked and distributed by the people is the economic system that is talked about in the Scripture. Yet in revelation, Joseph Smith said "It is not given that one man should possess that which is above another, wherefore the world lieth in sin" (D&C 49:20), because “If you are not equal in earthly things ye cannot be equal in obtaining heavenly things” (D&C 78:5-6).
The narrative, set about by our Heavenly Father, through revelation to Joseph Smith, speaks clearly of rejecting riches, and instead to care for the poor and needy. You must heed the warning of Samuel the Lamanite, “The day shall come when they shall hide up their treasures, because they have set their hearts upon riches; cursed be they and also their treasures.”
09/17/2015