Update: Because I don't have time to sort through old blog posts.

I'm not a libertarian anymore. Actually, I'm a lot more liberal (okay, moderate) than I used to be. I guess I'm quite the relativist when it comes to government, economics, culture, etc. I realize the need to discern what is important to a culture and to let them seek that. Sometimes (as I'm finding in Britain) people are willing and even, perhaps, eager to pay high taxes so everyone has access to a good health care system. (Yes, actually it is a very good health system. Don't listen to the conservatives who will tell you that nationalized health care will without exception go down the crapper.)

Anyway, there's a lot to say about my new/evolving economic/political views. But forgive me for my semi-dogmatic previous posts regarding politics. (Dogmatism is so hard to avoid. But I try.) I suppose future blog activity will indicate where I stand these days. Hm. Wait and see.

Oh, what a difference a month makes.

It has been a while, I guess. I've been neglectful. And yet, so much has happened, I can hardly express it all in blog posts.

First, I experienced Urbana '09 at the end of December. It wasn't shocking or revelatory or especially controversial... In fact, I thought it was beautifully biblical and in every way challenging. All in all, I felt a strong confirmation that I'll never be satisfied doing anything but missions. Now, that's not remarkable in any way--"missions" is pretty broad. But I do feel quite confident that I will spend my life doing some kind of work overseas, hopefully involving economic development and definitely focused on being part of people's lives. That's what I want to do, that's what I feel called to do.

Second, Libby and I made it to England on our own and managed to get around London and now Oxford with ease. It's fun to feel capable of navigating a new country on my own, but even more than that, it's marvelous to feel at home here. I can't attribute that sense of home to any great international sense that I have, but only to God's grace and the generosity of our host family here in Oxford.

Which brings me to the third element-- the people we've been spending time with here in England are a Godsend and a blessing. Steve and Jenny Hellyer are our dad and mom for the month and they are such examples of humble servants yearning for Christ. They radiate love wherever they go.

And I can't forget to mention the other lovely people from Taylor who are here with me: Dr. Ricke is fabulous and hilarious and I enjoy interacting with him and learning from him. Lib is the best J-term roommate ever and we get along as well as an old married couple. Caleb is easily one of my favorite people in existence (and that's even besides teaching us how to play Canasta). New lovely friend in my life is Kirsten Rose Wilhelm: bright, beautiful, and with a heart that's sold out for Christ. And my tutor, Diego, is gracious and patient with me and I'm learning so much.

Things haven't been all rosy, though. In fact, a lot of thing have been more challenging than ever--I've been facing obstacles and bearing burdens that I've never experienced before. All of that deserves a few posts all to themselves, really. But there's this amazingly difficult thing called trust (much like the faith that I can't rationalize) that hurts a lot of the time and always feels uncomfortable...and I've wrestled that beast with complete desperation at times in recent days. And even when I've submitted, it has felt like Jacob's hip being put out of joint as he wrestled the angel at Bethel.

Oh, God has been so present lately, even though I've often felt blind and far from Him. I'm sometimes afraid of what may come because I know it won't be anything easy. He doesn't ask for the simple things that are easy to sacrifice. No, He requires amputations sometimes. But I know good things will come, things that will give Him glory. And that is the purpose and joy of my being so I will choose to seek it.

Out of Sight, Out of Mind

I usually use that old saying in reference to long-distance friendships. John Hasnas (and Frederick Bastiat) remind us that it applies to politics, too.

From WSJ 5/29/09:

By JOHN HASNAS

While announcing Sonia Sotomayor as his nominee to the Supreme Court, President Barack Obama praised her as a judge who combined a mastery of the law with "a common touch, a sense of compassion, and an understanding of how the world works and how ordinary people live." This is in keeping with his earlier statement that he wanted to appoint a justice who possessed the "quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people's hopes and struggles." Without casting aspersions on Judge Sotomayor, we may ask whether these are really the characteristics we want in a judge.

Clearly, a good judge must have "an understanding of how the world works and how ordinary people live." Judicial decision-making involves the application of abstract rules to concrete facts; it is impossible to render a proper judicial decision without understanding its practical effect on both the litigants and the wider community.

But what about compassion and empathy? Compassion is defined as a feeling of deep sympathy for those stricken by misfortune, accompanied by a strong desire to alleviate the suffering; empathy is the ability to share in another's emotions, thoughts and feelings. Hence, a compassionate judge would tend to base his or her decisions on sympathy for the unfortunate; an empathetic judge on how the people directly affected by the decision would think and feel. What could be wrong with that? Frederic Bastiat answered that question in his famous 1850 essay, "What is Seen and What is Not Seen."

There the economist and member of the French parliament pointed out that law "produces not only one effect, but a series of effects. Of these effects, the first alone is immediate; it appears simultaneousl with its cause; it is seen. The other effects emerge only subsequently; they are not seen; we are fortunate if we foresee them." Bastiat further noted that "[t]here is only one difference between a bad economist and a good one: The bad economist confines himself to the visible effect; the good economist takes into account both the effect that can be seen and those effects that must be foreseen." This observation is just as true for judges as it is for economists. As important as compassion and empathy are, one can have these feelings only for people that exist and that one knows about -- that is, for those who are "seen."

Activism

There is a time and place for government intervention in the actions of the people. But I'm more convinced than ever that the true role of government in economics is much smaller (and the importance of private business is much greater) than anyone in DC would have us believe based on their policies.

An excerpt from The Economist

The American economy is dynamic because Americans like it that way, even now. A Pew poll released on May 21st found that 76% of Americans agree that the country’s strength is “mostly based on the success of American business” and 90% admire people who “get rich by working hard”...

Yet Mr Obama—and, even more, his Democratic allies in Congress—could do lasting damage to this marvellous machine. That is not because the president is a socialist, as his detractors on talk radio claim. No true leftist would be as allergic as he has been to nationalising tottering banks, nor as coldly calculating in letting Chrysler, and probably General Motors, end up in bankruptcy court.

Moreover, even the most stalwart defenders of the free market, including this newspaper, admit it has shortcomings that only the government can address. The financial system requires close oversight, or crises will destabilise it. In recent years, such oversight has often been absent or fragmented...And the current crisis calls for aggressive and temporary fiscal and monetary intervention that is not justified in ordinary times.

But the Democrats’ present zeal for government activism often goes well beyond addressing market failures. The president and Congress seem to believe that they can surgically intervene in the economy but overlook the unintended consequences.

Fiscal and monetary policy are more powerful than an atomic bomb. Milton Friedman said that they should only be used to balance the natural growth of the economy, that there is no place for monetary activism in a stable economy. I wouldn't even go so far as to say that this is a "crisis" in the way that most Americans imagine it. Economists are the last ones to freak out in a recession because they have a long-term, "big picture," wholistic perspective of what's going on. (That's just one of the reasons economics is such an attractive subject to me. Everyone's just chill and levelheaded. It's beautifully unemotional.)

We talk about "what should be done" but fail to consider that things often sort themselves out with less intervention than we suppose when we're in the middle of it. Economics always seek equilibrium and rarely need government assistance to do so. Whether we're implementing a National Sales Tax or creating a Systemic Risk Council, if we think in terms of "There's no room for more delays!" as José Manuel Barroso said, we will run into more trouble than we can see from our shortsighted perspective.

Stimulus vs. Spending and all the other things they want you to think

In Commentary Magazine, John Podhoretz wrote about the stimulus plan and all the ways that Obama and the non-economists on Capitol Hill think that almost $800 billion will improve our economy.

Towards the end of the article he points out that the concept of government spending in order to help the economy is so shallow, seeking to fix the symptoms rather than the disease. But isn't that what politicians seek to do?? They want results and not only that, but results that are clear and obvious in time for the next election year. This isn't cynical--it's reality.

But as Dr. Mitchell was saying in macroeconomics yesterday, the business cycle of recession/trough/expansion/peak is a fluctuating cycle that lasts some ten years. Pelosi said, "I don't think we can move fast enough." Well, Nance, unless you can change time itself, get over it. Big (and natural) processes take time and time doesn't accept bribes--even to the tune of 3/4 of a trillion dollars.

Re: Addiction

How did Obama convince anyone to imagine that huge, monstrous spending could possibly be responsible??

James Capretta of NRO on the stimulus bill:

The contention that these programs, once started or expanded, will revert back to their previous levels of activity, or even disappear altogether when circumstances warrant, runs counter to all experience and common sense. Program enrollees, local school boards, health researchers, university administrators, IT firms, transportation-construction companies, and countless new government contractors and employees will soon be ready to argue that disaster awaits any attempt to return government to its pre-stimulus size.

(full article)

The stats in that article are astounding. Read it.

I Always Knew "Rock the Vote" Wasn't Neutral

So the non-profit that is constantly seeking my generation's input in politics is taking a stance on the stimulus issue. Considering that they spend most of their resources in seeking the vote of college students, it's curious that their endorsement is so uneducated and I'd bet none of them ever took a basic economics course. But college kids and senators make the same mistakes sometimes in becoming hooked on legal addictive stimulants, whether coffee or so-called "recovery packages."

The mass e-mail of the week said this:

"Earlier today, President Obama signed into law the economic recovery plan, the biggest and boldest investment in America’s economy we’ve seen in 40 years.

Seriously, this is a big deal. Our economy is in freefall - we lost 3.6 million jobs in the past year - and a major fix is needed, now.

President Obama’s plan will inject billions of dollars into the economy - almost all of it this year and next - which leading economists say is desperately needed to create jobs and get people spending again. ...Democrats and Republicans alike have made clear the plan will help stop worst case job losses and budget cuts in their states."

They then go on to cite all the "big and bold" things the stimulus package will supposedly do for us (though they do neglect to cite how we'll pay for it all.)

As much as I could nit-pick this whole little e-mail apart, I think the thing that stands out to me is the bit in the middle paragraph, "a major fix is needed, now." If there's anything I've learned in my recent love affair with economic thought, it's that practically speaking, you can't make big changes now.

They all talk as if the economy is a single-celled organism that can be revitalized within four years (conveniently in time for reelection...hm.) Unfortunately, the quick-fix benefits don't outlast the consequences. Problem with this $787 billion stimulant is that, just like your favorite grande Americano with an extra shot and no room, the effects wear off...and you're left with a pretty damn horrible headache in the end.

Are you trying to tell me that things actually work out sometimes?!

Okay. This is a story if I ever heard one.

Last October, I went to the generic Spring Break Missions meeting with no expectations. I heard about all of the locations and trips and I didn't really feel particularly drawn to any of them...until I explored the Nicaragua trip a bit more. It's a missions trip for business majors and Spanish majors (of which I am neither) and it was quite a leap of the imagination to think that I would be accepted to the trip. But I applied anyway and also e-mailed Dr. Hadley Mitchell, economics professor and leader of the trip. This is what I said to him:

My interest in business is both personal and public service-oriented. One of the reasons business and economics are so fascinating is because they are a perfect example of how individual actions impact the rest of one's community and the rest of the world. In both individual and community life, I believe stewardship is one of the key ways a Christian, a true follower of Christ, is set apart from the world.
First, my personal interest in business comes from a desire to use my personal resources—talents and finances—for God's glory. For example, I am currently acting as director of media relations (drafting business plans, investor letters, and other technical writing) in a growing entrepreneurial endeavor with a few other TU students. While our company's public goal is to assist artists in the business world, our private goal is to create a stable resource to serve and finance non-profit missions organizations. We are not only filling an immediate and practical need, we are also seeking to ultimately do God's work.
Second, I am fascinated by the impact of business and economics on government, international politics, and missions. The influence and reach of economics is so broad that I think Christians fail too often to realize how much potential we have to minister through business. To come into a community and bring food and medical care is a wonderful imitation of Christ's love for people with great material needs; but I think we can do even more than that.
As Frédéric Bastiat said, "Life cannot support itself." However, by fostering communities that are self-sustaining—whether by digging wells, teaching agricultural techniques, or developing local businesses and creating jobs—Christians can fight for the life and well-being of the poor with a long-term perspective. When we enable and encourage people in impoverished communities to support themselves, we show them that they are valuable—both as children of God who deserve the basic necessities of life, and as contributing members of a community, with special abilities and purposes who can support themselves and their families. This offers not only the means for life, but also a reason to live.

Good, huh? Yep. But to no avail. Weeks passed and I heard literally nothing about Spring Break, whether I was accepted to any trip, much less my first choice. Then just before J-term break, I received an e-mail informing me that I was accepted to the Chicago trip, my 3rd choice.

Now it's two weeks into spring semester, I'm a little on the swamped side, and spring break is rolling along...until yesterday when Dr. Mitchell interrupted my lunch at the DC. He just sat down at my table full of 2nd South girls and started talking to me and I was thoroughly amused. He recommended a book, saying something like "I'm going to suggest this to all of you..." and I thought he meant my macro class. Then I realized that he thought I was going on the Nicaragua trip. I told him that I wasn't accepted, that I was going to Chicago instead. He just said, "It's warmer in Nicaragua." Basically, he said there's a spot open and he wants me to come. WHAT?!

At first I was thinking that it was impossible--heck, you can't back out of these things! Once you accept, you're in. Then I get this e-mail today, saying that Dr. Mitchell requested that I join the SIFE trip to Nicaragua. SHEIZ! No kidding.

So although it was a hard thing to "abandon" Chicago, it was really an easy choice to make. I don't hastily credit God for bunches of stuff that happens, but some things "work together for good" like I could never even imagine. This is absolutely sick.

Paradox

(I regret that this is very jumbled... I could easily turn it into a book if I really developed all of these thoughts, but for the moment it is simply an explosion of thoughts.)

Sometimes the most obscure things bring everything else into perfect clarity.

I picked up Real Sex by Lauren Winner this weekend (since I don't have enough half-finished books to read). Along with the general commentary about chastity and sexual purity, one chapter specifically responded to the individualism that is so pervasive in our culture. Though Winner addressed it specifically as regards our attitudes towards sexuality, I began to understand a conflict in my own heart and mind.

It's the paradox of individual liberty and God-ordained community and I see it everywhere.

It's a paradox in the church. A Christian's spiritual life is not complete if he attends church services every week or even perhaps if he is heavily involved with the church body. It is a personal and individual relationship between him and God. However, neither is Christian's spiritual life complete if he is attentive in personal devotions and spiritual growth if he neglects the community around him and the body of believers. Both are entirely necessary, 100% and 100%.

It's a paradox in economics. God created man to have dominion over himself and his property. We are created to be stewards and it is wrong and unjust for the government to interfere with our natural rights and liberties regarding property. However, as stewards we must also look to satisfy the needs of others. We cannot neglect the poor and destitute in our neighborhoods and around the world merely because we have responsibility and rights to seek our own.

It's a paradox in family life. I am an individual with my own ambitions, my own friends, my own pursuits and interests. But I have four sisters and two parents who are committed and connected to me and I to them. I cannot make decisions about what I'll do on a given school break without considering how it might affect them.

And this paradox extends throughout every aspect of life, I think.

You could also say that the church has responded to an increasing sense of individualism in the United States by turning to more liberal economics. Our rationale goes something like, "if Christians aren't giving or helping the poor of their own choice, let the government intervene." Translation: if people aren't choosing to live in community with one another, let the government force us to live in community with one another.

And therein lies the irony-- the selflessness that creates the truly beloved community is sacrificed for artificial and forced community; indeed, true selflessness only comes when we have freedom to choose for ourselves.

I believe the solution or explanation for this paradox comes once again from God's crazy idea to give human beings the right, responsibility, and opportunity to CHOOSE for themselves. We choose whether or not to give to the poor. We CHOOSE whether or not to be wise in how we use our money. We CHOOSE our form of government. We CHOOSE whether to participate in the local church. We CHOOSE whether we study scripture and develop our individual relationships with Christ. CHOICE. It's all about CHOICE--the free will to choose to do what is best.

So in the end, we portion our lives, we decide how something affects us and those around us, we weigh the many factors that contribute to our decisions and evaluate which is most important. What affects me? What affects those around me? God created us individually. We are individuals. God also created us to live in community.

Bastiat said that liberty is faith in God and His works. I think one reason God gave us free will is for our own soul-making, as Dr. David Smith would say. If I, living in a free-market economy, choose to give my money to the poor, that not only benefits them as a socialist economy would (claim to) do, but it benefits me because I become more like Christ in my choice to give. Regarding my family, my parents could certainly demand that I return to Homewood, IL every time we have a school break; instead they allow me to be somewhat autonomous, knowing that should I choose to return home, the the time spent with them even more significant because I made the decision myself.

So this paradox--being created as individuals yet being called to live in community--is resolved by God's big picture purpose. With every opportunity to make an autonomous decision--in political economy, in the church, in one's family--we also have the opportunity to grow more like Christ by the decision we make. To have a decision forced upon us is short-sighted. It sees merely the end and neglects to consider the means. It regards the destination as more important than the journey. In so doing, it also takes for granted God's perfect judgment in how He created us and how He created us to live--individuals woven together in community.

I used to plan my life to a T, but I found out you can’t plan people and people are the best part of life. So I’ve mostly ditched planning these days.

For the last 9 years of my life, I've spent each day in constant anticipation of what's to come. I look forward to this, schedule that, need to know how something will turn out in the end.

For the last 9 months, I've felt like every day I've been on the brink of something. God has been preparing me for each new day and something marvelous always seemed to be on the horizon.

Today, I'm suddenly struck that waiting is over. I'm done planning my life and constantly waiting for something new to happen.

I'm suddenly struck with the painful thought that after May 23, my life will never be the same as it is in this period of love and learning. Suddenly, I'm afraid once more that I will lose something at the end of the spring semester (though it hasn't even begun yet.)

I was always waiting for something to come...now I'm afraid that I'll lose what I've gained...is life really always this unsettling?? Is it constant flux, unending anticipation of change? It seems to demand a patience that I am so unable to procure in myself. I sometimes feel like I can't deal with it. I just want things to stop for a moment and let the world revolve without anything else changing.


And yet...


"Nothing ever really ends but something new doesn't begin. When something ends in our sight, it begins somewhere else where we can't hear it or see it or feel it."

With the threat of things going badly also comes the possibility that they will become even better somehow. (I could make an economics illustration here, but I'll stand against that impulse.)

Anyway, I'm done making plans. What bull! My plans are so pitiful. And then I try to make them come true by my own measures, though that's never miracle enough to be of any good. Forget that trash.

Michelle Malkin said it best...

And Now, Back to Our Regularly Scheduled Spending Orgy

Obama hasn't even gotten started and his spending plan is already one EPIC FAIL under his

Inauguration

He fumbled the oath and it was kinda cute. Okay, I'm feeling it now. I'm a little sentimental. My emotionalism is overtaking my rationalism...

until he opened his mouth.

"…because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents." EF - Not. What happened to the independent powers of the states and the limited federal government that the constitution established?

"These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable but no less profound is a sapping of confidence across our land - a nagging fear that America's decline is inevitable, and that the next generation must lower its sights." EF - Yes, I've said this before. I don't think it's that far off, either. But don't call me a cynic--a realist, man.

"On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics." EF - Oh, yeah, like the abortion issue?

"…the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness." EF - I don't recall where Jesus said that all have equality on this earth in any regard, whether wealth, education, ambition, knowledge, happiness, or sorrow; only that it is fleeting and won't be an issue in God's ultimate reality.

"Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things - some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom." EF - These are the ones Obama wants to simultaneously reward and suppress by establishing an economy of "equality."

"...lay a new foundation for growth." Bastiat - Liberty is an act of faith in God and in His work. EF - That is, God already laid the foundation.

"Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions - who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage...
What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them - that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end." EF - By establishing an economy that does not allow people to act based on natural motivation and incentives, people will be less and less able to react appropriately with new ideas and responses to "necessity and common purpose." It's just not logical to think that the government can take more power and not infringe on the rights, liberties, and autonomy of individuals. As for the accusation of being "cynical," Mr. Obama fails to understand that by allowing people more liberty, you in fact demonstrate your faith in people to do what is right, to govern themselves, and to respond to the needs of others and not need an over-active government to do it.

One thing he was right about: we do need a new era of responsibility. We do have duties, as individuals and as a nation. But it is wrong to confuse the two. The hard thing to acknowledge is that our individual duties extend further than our national duties do. The hard task to attempt comes from our personal responsibility to be wise and compassionate in our actions instead of letting our government take over. God did not give everyday individuals rational minds with the intention that they'd use it once every four years and let their democratically elected executive official take over the rest of the time.

And there's way more to say about this too... hopefully people won't fail to keep discussing it.

Not Solved Yet

All over school, they're telling us to be happy at least for the inauguration of the first black president of the United States.

I'm sorry. I just can't be that simple-minded.

The Obama presidency means different things to different people. What his economic and social policies will be and do remains to be seen, but we can predict closely enough that he will try to usher in a more socialist and broad-reaching government. There's nothing happy in that. But even policy aside...

Everyone keeps trying to tell us that it's such a wonderful thing that the first black president is being inaugurated. It's a "huge milestone" as they say. I just can't see that, though. I don't think there are "huge milestones" in real life, in the big picture of things. There isn't something magical that happens to the nation now that our president comes from a minority ethnicity. Racism isn't going to disappear tomorrow as Obama takes the oath. Lower class schools that are packed to the brim with minority students, most of whom will drop out before they turn 16, will not suddenly improve.

If people really thought about it, they'd realize that the magic equalization of all people won't come from the skin color of the man who works in the Oval Office. If people actually learn about it, they'd also realize that the magic equalization of all people certainly won't come from his socialist economic policies either. But that's what they're expecting.

Now, I will agree that a black president is a good indicator of how far we've come... but it's not some precise mile-marker that says "You've come this far and you have this much left to go!!" Nothing is that simple.

I think the only thing that puts all of us on an equal footing in any sense of the word is, in fact, sin. Not wealth, not rights, not education, not jobs. We are not raised to equal footing, but lowered to it. Only sin separates us all from God. Only sin corrupts our nature and our minds so we are incapable of knowing or learning everything; indeed, the pursuit of what we can never fully attain remains man's ultimate purpose. Only sin throws a wrench into God's perfect system of reason and liberty so that economics, politics, intellectual pursuit, and human relationships will never be (on this earth) what they were designed to be. And sin doesn't discriminate.

Finally, let me emphasize that my biggest concern is that people (white people, especially) will think that they've done something grand and glorious by merely electing a man from a minority to be our president. The road to racial reconciliation doesn't end with the election of one man or with the supposed socio-economic equalization of different races or by having minorities represent a certain percentage of the wealthiest one percent. Damn, no. Reconciliation is an on-going battle in our hearts, minds, neighborhoods, families, classrooms, and schools. No statistic or inauguration will ever tell us that this battle is over because it will last until doomsday.

So when President Barack Obama solemly swears to faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States, and to the best of his ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States...

...don't stop fighting.