Hey guys! Last time Lisa shared her story of how she became a conservative. Well now, it’s my turn.
It all happened about a year and a half ago. I started my senior year at a new high school, not expecting this last year to be anything significant, other than that it would be the year I would finally finish high school.
First semester, I was in a U.S. history class. My teacher was a middle-aged, gray haired, old dude whose job was to teach us a sweeping history of the United States. Having grown up in New Zealand and moved here only a few years ago, I was not too familiar with American history, so a lot of what he taught us in this class was new to me. At that point, I wasn’t very knowledgeable about political matters either, let alone know what Conservatism and Liberalism really stood for. I saw myself as somewhat conservative on social issues but for everything else, I was really unsure and I really didn’t care. As for most teens, politics was an irrelevant subject to me and not something I wanted to waste my youth over.
So at first I didn’t take much notice of what he taught us and just took the information at face value. However, as the semester progressed, it became clear to me that he was really one-sided, favoring everything liberal and disparaging anything conservative or religious about America’s history. He taught us as fact that America was not founded on anything religious at all, early Americans were intentionally genocidal, big government had solved all economic problems in the past, it was capitalism that had caused the Great Depression, and FDR saved America with his vast government programs. His account of history was also very anti-American. In every conflict in foreign policy, it was always: blame America first.
He talked long and hard about how great the Democratic presidents like FDR were, but dismissed or denigrated all the recent Republican ones. Reagan was not so great a president as the conservatives claimed; no, he was just a B-list actor who had been incapable of doing anything great, let alone actually won the Cold War. Nixon was just a crook, Bush I was pretty bad, but Bush II was the worst and stupidest president ever to hit the face of America.
Now, this kind of anti-American, anti-conservative, anti-religious description of America really went too far for me not to take notice. However, having spent a good many years in public schools which taught its students along this liberal line, I really didn’t know what to believe or know what the other side of the story was. Coincidentally, around this same time, the elections were gearing up to begin, with the presidential nomination races for both Democrats and Republicans already in full force. So with these events in the horizon and with some questions brewing in my head, I thought, perhaps it was time I figured out something about politics.
So what did the conservatives think about these issues? Were Republican leaders really that dumb, as this teacher portrayed? Were there any great Republican presidents at all? And which candidate should I support for the next elections?
Luckily, my older sister, Lisa, had recently gone on a craze reading about politics to prepare for the 2008 elections. So she was all too eager to share her knowledge and books with me. Lisa gave me a copy of Letters to a Young Conservative, by Dinesh D’Souza, the book, she said, that had really opened her eyes to conservative ideas and changed her life. Lofty claims, I thought. So I gave it a go.
Well hate to admit it but she was right. It actually changed my life too. Once I started understanding Conservative ideas a little more, I realized they validated a lot of what I already thought about the world and was very much in line with my Christian beliefs. It spurred me to read a whole bunch of books that got in depth about why the ideas of Conservatism were a whole lot better than the ideas of Liberalism.
I realized that Conservatism is a political ideology that is much more in line with reality and therefore, creates a political system that works. Why does it work? Because it is not afraid to admit that we live in a world where bad things happen and people are imperfect and evil and prone to doing bad things, especially when there is no one around or no one to stop them. Was this true? Well, human history is, unfortunately, filled with examples like Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Genghis Khan, and Mao Zedong who have ruthlessly killed thousands or millions of people.
Liberalism maintains that humans are actually really good inside, so when bad things happen it must be because bad people who seem to do these bad things were misunderstood and just needed some rehabilitation to get them on the right path. They think that by talking things out, like what Neville Chamberlain did over and over again to appease Hitler, that that would be enough to solve all the conflicts and wars that have plagued humanity since the beginning of time.
So their great 20th century solution was to create the United Nations with this high hope. It was indeed an honorable aspiration. However, has it worked? No, it has not. It was based on a flawed assumption that we could magically get rid of this badness in people when we can’t because it is just, unfortunately, inherent in humans. It seems that when I turn on my T.V., the news everyday still tells me a heck of a lot of bad stuff is going and I have no reason to think that that will ever change. However, Liberalism still likes to maintain the fairytale that humans are making progress, sticking its head in the sand and pretending that reality doesn’t say anything different. Of course there is a need to talk and that should be our first option. However, talk without action is useless. When countless millions of human lives are at stake by what governments do and don’t do, we cannot afford the luxury to think that evil people like Kim Jong Il or Saddam Hussein can be rehabilitated while they go on killing hundreds of thousands of their own people.
Conservatism understands that humans are driven by incentives and do things for their own self-interest. For example, if Best Buy were giving away HDTVs, that would be a good incentive to go get your free TV. Would there be many people lining up at Best Buy? You better believe it. Along the lines of this idea, Conservatism creates a government that would create incentives for people to work hard and be productive by lowering taxes, while deterring them away from laziness, crime, and other harmful activities by instituting consequences. Liberals on the other hand give incentives for people to rely on the government and penalizing those who are most productive. If the government gives me money for not working, what’s the point of my occupational efforts? Also, if government raises taxes so high that it’s not profitable for me to start a business and hire other workers, why would anyone start a new business?
This understanding of human nature is what makes capitalism work so well. The age-old liberal attack on capitalism is that it’s a system that rewards greed and self-interest. However, greed and self-interest is just a fact of human nature. Capitalism didn’t make those up. The purpose and genius of capitalism is that it provides an economic system which channels those undesirable traits for productive ends.
Society needs entrepreneurs, inventors, medical researchers, and valuable citizens like that. These people invent and sell products that improve our lives and raise our standard of living. Just think of how much better life is with commodities like cars, electricity, the vacuum cleaner, dishwashers, computers, the Ipod, etc. However, it isn’t just an improvement in our standard of living, but many of the products that businesses manufacture are medicines and other lifesaving products that make life even possible for some people.
Perhaps some good-willed individuals would spend countless hours producing those products for others for no reward at all; however, most of us mortals aren’t so altruistic. For most of us, the incentive for making money from our efforts is the easiest and most guaranteed way for us to get off our butts and do something productive for humanity. And that is what Adam Smith realized when he engineered this whole brilliant system of capitalism.
Having said that, I acknowledge that corruption happens all the time with businesses and there is no way to condone it. However, corruption and wrongdoing are not restricted to the business world alone; it is a fact in every sphere of society, including government. It is the corruption that we need to get rid of and the wrongdoers that need to be punished, not the entire system itself.
Well, after having learned so many new and eye-opening things about Conservatism and Liberalism like this, I also learned that a large portion of what I had learned in history classes were a whole bunch of lies and half-truths that made liberalism look a whole lot better than in reality. If you want to know more, check out the book I’m pretending to be reading so intensely in the picture above: 48 Liberal Lies About American History (That You Probably Learned in School).
In an effort not to fill your brain up with too much information that you can’t keep it all in, I’ll stop right here and finish this up. So, in short, that is how I, Aaron Wong, came to be a political conservative.
[AW & LS]
So glad to see young people thinking outside of the box of todays Media and Schools indoctrination. We’ve all been had, but when we walk with a right God, we can’t go too far left. Good for you, and I pray you touch your generation.
Very well written essay, but it is kind of startling to see someone so devoted to Christianity condemning a portion of humanity as destined to be evil or unable to be rehabilitated. Sure, there are very evil people in the world, this much is obvious, but doesn’t God give everyone free will? I am in no way nullifying or rationalizing in favor of atrocities like the Holocaust or what Hussein was doing to the people of Iraq before he was removed from power, but isn’t it our calling as Christians to love everyone, ESPECIALLY our enemies? In addition, but on a completely different subject
, I find it hard to argue for conservative economics these days. Think back to Clinton shall we? (I’m sure the typical conservative point of “the system was set up to fail” will surface) It was the most recent period in American history in which the national debt wasn’t astronomical! I just feel like the guy got a bad rap thanks to some less-than-reputable decisions made while in office, when, in actuality, he was a pretty good president. Well, I feel like I am starting to ramble, so I suppose I will cut it off here. Great essay, fantastic blog, and keep doing what y’all are doing 
To Scott-
Okay I don’t really know you but I feel I should clarify what Aaron said since you didn’t get it. He is in no way condemning certain sects of people as evil. He is stating a fact that ALL humans are evil as the Bible states many times. For example in Ephesians 2 “…Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath”. What Paul is saying is that Christians, like all the rest of humans, are “objects of wrath”, or evil. The difference is we are saved from the evil nature by God’s amazing love. So when we become Christians and follow God we become “in His likeness”, meaning we become good because Christ in us is good. Also, Aaron said no where in his blog to not love others or enemies. This free will that God has given us, as you pointed out, is a free will to choose Him or not, to choose evil or good. And this is not to say that when people become Christians they become good and lose their evil self. It just means that if we let God be the center of our lives he will lead us away from sin and into his righteousness. As the Word also says- we are in constant struggle with that evil we are prone to.
And about your Clinton comment- yes his PERSONAL reputation is bad, but his political reputation is alive and well. In fact he often gets too much credit- the credit for, which you also believed, the economy. I am not saying he was a bad president, in fact he was one of the better democratic presidents. However the reason we got out of astronomical debt was mainly because of Reagan. People don’t realize the economy takes time to digress, and time to heal. For example FDRs huge ploy to make government bigger (and I’m clearly speaking of the New Deal) seemed great at the time. But over a long period of time, after many sub prime loans were given out to many unqualified people (because of pressure from liberal activists claiming banks were being discriminatory) the economy collapsed. Freddie Mac and Frannie Mae, which were created by FDR and privatized by LBJ, called out for a bail-out. And who is this collapse blamed on? President Bush of course! Because everything is his fault! In the same way Reagan often gets stripped of the glory that Bill Clinton basks in. Also, to make this argument current, and because I can’t stand to leave Obama untouched, this “stimulus” package (man i hate calling it that) will do nothing but further burden the economy! The White House says we need a quick fix now but that isn’t possible. It takes years to come out of a recession. And if they’re are ridiculously expensive riders attached to the bill we may just dig ourselves in further.
To Michaela-
Oh, and while I did vote for Barack Obama, it doesn’t in any way mean that this new stimulus package doesn’t scare the crap out of me!! I just hope that the American government doesn’t revert to the outdated methodology that “desperate times call for desperate measures.” As our past has shown us, desperate times call for patience and trust in God. 
I completely got what Aaron was saying, and I don’t disagree with it, I was just bringing up the opposite viewpoint more for argumentation’s sake than anything. Having said that, I just tend to be optimistic and think that there is always hope for the lost, call me an idealist, I am an admitted liberal, so if the shoes fits I suppose… In regards to being born evil, this is true, but when Christ died for our sins we were given the grace to die to our old selves and be born anew in Christ. At the same time though, you can also argue that, no matter how righteous the man, everyone sins, so we should just assume evil intentions rather than hope for good intentions. Just look at the story of David and Bathsheba, a “man after God’s own heart” committing adultery and eventually, for all intents and purposes, murder. Changing directions completely… I never mentioned Bush (I don’t think…), and I would agree that he gets a bad rap for basically being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The American economy is, in many ways, a living, breathing thing, which, as you so eloquently stated, takes time to heal and digress. We can nitpick policies from all presidencies until our faces our blue (or rather until our fingers are tired, whichever the case may be) but it seems that, through history, the economy dictates itself, with “stimulus” packages and other policies attempting to bolster an economy that will eventually stabilize, grow, then fall all over again. To attempt to wrap up this convoluted mini-essay, I completely understood/understand what Aaron was saying, and agree with you in EVERYTHING that you said, I was just bringing up the opposite to spark discussion, and I did exactly that! YAY ME!
Scott, I’m surprised that someone who calls himself a Christian actually questions or doubts the fundamental doctrine of original sin. Like Michaela said, it is not the case that just a portion of humanity is destined to be evil, the Bible says that every single human being who is born into this world is born with a sin nature. There is nothing that we, ourselves, can do to change that nature. We are born with it. We inherited it merely by being human.
There are so many references of this in the Bible. That is why I believe Liberalism is wrong from the outset. They believe we are not born bad or evil, but it is our surroundings that make us that way. Look up the philosopher Rousseau to understand from where liberals get this viewpoint. So how does that measure up with Christianity? Jeremiah 17:9 says “The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?” Note that it says “beyond cure”. Moreover, in Romans 5:12 it says, “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned.” Even the great apostle Paul, acknowledged he was the worst of sinners. See, if you are not convinced that all humans are very sinful and beyond repair, the Good News would not mean much to you. However, it is precisely because all of us are so sinful and beyond rehabilitation that there needed to be a Savior to save us from the wrath that we would surely face for every single one of our iniquities. Jesus took it upon Himself, taking away that condemnation of death and hell. However, does that mean humans are instantly cured of their sinful nature when they become Christians? If only it were that easy! Paul says in Romans 7 that he was still a “slave to sin” despite all that he was doing for the Lord.
So does that mean that we should let people go on thieving, murdering, and raping, and dictators go on killing hundreds of thousands of people? Of course we should love our enemies and pray for them. But when a person goes that far to violate someone else’s body, or thousands of people’s lives, are we supposed to just stand there and let this evil perpetuate? Our law system demands justice, that evil acts like these are never tolerated or condoned. These are high violations of the law and if we have any respect for our law system, retribution is necessitated. For example, if a father sexually molests his own children, do we just stand aside, praying and loving him by hoping that he will change one day? Of course not. That would be totally absurd. We would take that man away, put him on trial, and protect those children from their father’s further offensive acts. So when thousands or millions of peoples’ lives are at the mercy of a man, intent on his evil intentions, what kind of love and justice are we showing to those countless people?
Who said I didn’t get original sin or human’s sinful nature? I never said I didn’t get that, I’m a Religion major for crying out loud. ALL I said was that I like to hold to the belief that no one is lost and beyond the reach of God’s grace. You have misconstrued everything I said in order to serve your purpose and I find it offensive to be completely honest. I never said I supported dictators who torture and kill their people, I never said we should let criminal go free, I just said it isn’t our place to condemn people. God is the only person with the right to judge. Sure, we should put away rapists and murderers in prison, this is obvious, but it doesn’t mean that we can’t pray for them and love them and hope that someday they can find God’s grace, dying to their old selves. I think it is easy to judge the glaringly obvious problems in society such as rape, murder, molestation and so on, but while people who do the “unthinkable” sins take all of the heat, it leaves the rest of us free to commit “petty” sins such as adultery, lust, gossip and so on. Sure, the former deserve immediate lock up and removal from society, I get that, my head isn’t in the sand, but to God, sin is sin. As Matthew 7:1-5 says, “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” Sure, certain planks or specks carry a larger social stigma, AS THEY SHOULD, but we are in no place to look down on someone. Lock them up, sure. Isolate them, of course, this is logical. Don’t judge these people, that is ALL I was trying to convey. Romans 3:23 “for ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”
In addition, when reading over my comments, I actually argued more in favor of sinful nature than in opposition of it… “In regards to being born evil, this is true”, this is a direct quote from my post prior to yours, I feel, for some odd reason, that I am completely agreeing with original sin…
Well isn’t this a great little discussion we’ve got going on! Since Aaron nailed the reply in terms of theology and since you, Scott, are a RELIGION major I would like to ask you then a few questions about politics that have been floating around my head since your first post. (lets hope you aren’t minoring in political science or else it looks like I’m in trouble!) First and foremost, why exactly did you vote for Barack Obama? What made his policies, or rather liberal policies as a whole, more logical than those of McCain or the conservative party? You say you find it hard to fight for conservative economics these days yet claimed to be scared of the stimulus package. But isn’t it what liberals want? And what makes conservative economics so hard to fight for? And lastly, I would like to pose the question how, in your opinion, does being a liberal reflect your religious and moral beliefs?
First off, I am not a political science minor, so no worries there. Secondly, I am morally conservative, as Christians tend to be, which I’m sure is obvious. I in absolutely noooo way agree with Barack Obama’s startlingly staunch stands on abortion and I also completely support keeping marriage defined as a union between a man and a woman. In all honesty, the reason I voted for Barack Obama is because of one issue that I cannot get over. Namely, the War in Iraq. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m sure we are doing great things over there and making progress in every sense of the word, I just can’t back an administration that lied to the American people about its reasoning for going to war. Iraq had/has no Al-Qaeda connections as well as no “WMD’s,” and I can’t get over the fact that innocent lives, both Iraqi civilians and American soldiers, have been lost in a war started over a lie. Let me stop and emphasize something, I am not saying we should have left Hussein in power, I am ecstatic that he is no longer terrorizing that country (or anyone for that matter). But here is my major hang up, why not finish things the first time around? Why not take him out of power in the first Gulf War? Sure, hindsight is 20/20 and all that jazz, but I just can’t get over being lied to about something that cost so many American lives. So, to answer your question, in all honesty, I was tired of Republican reign over this nation and was ready for a change. I am ready for a change in what has been, in my opinion, horrendous foreign policy as well as poor energy management. I am a big fan of pushing for a new energy source and weaning this nation off of our addiction to oil. I also support the liberal taxation structure as well as welfare. I get the argument that people shouldn’t rely on welfare and government handouts as a way to do nothing and get by, but by the same token I feel like the super-mega-rich shouldn’t hoard their money and get exponentially richer. It makes sense, to me, for the rich to take a higher tax burden. When someone with an absurd amount of money gets taxed a slightly higher percentage, they have a slightly less absurd amount of money. I understand that they worked to get where they are, which is fantastic, but I feel at some point there is a line that should be drawn between success and greed. I hope I have made some of my thoughts a bit clearer. I am, to simplify things, a morally conservative, economically liberal person.
Hi Scott,
Sorry for the confusion over our last comment. I was only answering your very first comment and elaborating on Michaela’s. So I’m glad you clarified your points and that we in fact do have a lot of common ground.
I am really impressed with your engagement on these issues. It’s not often that college students care about stuff like this and we just want you to know we appreciate your input in this ongoing conversation.
Thanks for keeping things civil and non-offensive.
Its my pleasure to dialogue about these things, in all honesty I don’t have many outlets for such discussion, so this is very refreshing. I find every point that is brought up, even opposite mine, completely valid. These discussions are super useful for me because my views on things are ever-changing, and I try as much as possible to always be growing. You guys are awesome and I always love to read your blog!
First of all Scott I would like to also thank you. This has been a very good and civil conversation that definitely has been refreshing! I see valid points on your side as well and greatly respect them. I can see you are truly searching for the heart of God within politics and I think this discussion is useful for all of us. It is important to be comfortable to be challenged and to know how to not be offended by others’ opinions. With that said I would now like to respectfully challenge your views once again… Once I read your reply I began refreshing my knowledge on the War in Iraq in order to back myself, and the Bush administration, up with valid facts. However, in the middle of my research I had a feeling this wouldn’t pursuade you because it seems you have already decided what you believe is fiction and truth. I figured the fact that Clinton was the first to suspect Iraq of having WMDs and responded by a four day bombing period, wouldn’t change anything you believed about the Bush administration. And you may still not believe, or it may not matter to you, that there is proof that Iraq had materials for WMDs and had potential of possessing them in about a month, because this does not change the fact that many innocent people have still been killed.
So, I decided to change my approach, and here it goes… I understand your opposition to the war in terms of the lives taken. However, is this reason enough to completely change political parties? It seems many of your views are in fact still conservative and this is great! But lets look at this from a bigger picture. Lets assume you are completely right and justified in your thoughts and beliefs about the war. By changing parties you completely switch out the beliefs of one party for another. When you chose to vote for Obama you advocated liberalism. And what does liberalism say- it says abortion is a woman’s right, gay marriage should be legal and not supporting it is discrimination, war is bad and conflicts should be resolved by peaceful negotiation, all humans are inherently good, you are only truly free when you attain inner freedom- the list goes on but i’ll stop there because those are the main things I want to discuss. So with that laid out I ask you, are all those things, your beliefs on gay marriage and abortion most importantly, worth giving up? Also I would like to point out, still assuming you are right about the war, that the actions and decisions of one administration and some of its supporters DOES NOT change the basic fundamental principles of conservatism. Sometimes those high in the political party may get off base of their parties’ values and, yes, this reflects the parties values, but when this happens the people have to stand up and speak out against their own party to make sure they stay in line with true conservative values. Back to my original argument are those things worth giving up? Just think about it, by voting for Obama you advocated the deaths of many more babies killed in abortion than people killed in Iraq. Are the deaths of soldiers and civilians in Iraq, who in my view are dieing for a very legitimate cause, more valuable than the lives of the unborn. While the human mind responds yes, I think the heart of God would say no. Every human life is valuable and he treasures every one.
Now lets look at gay marriage. Once again ask yourself, are the actions of one administration worth advocating the sins of so many people? Liberalism says, as i said earlier, that being free is having inner freedom. This inner freedom means that you dont let anything hold you back from being happy. If you can’t express yourself, you aren’t truly free. The reason I bring this up within my discussion of gay marriage is because by being liberal you don’t only advocate the sin of homosexuality, but all sexual sin. When liberals say “do whatever makes you happy” this means experiment! Try drugs if you want, have sex with your boyfriend/girlfriend, if you have inclinations to the same sex its okay! As Christians we know that this is wrong and unbiblical. As a side note I would like to point out that all sexual sin is the same- homosexuality, sex before marriage… And sadly this is one thing that many conservatives and all liberals don’t always tend to believe. So, Scott, although the lives lost are indeed tragedy, are your reasons reason enough to support these liberal beliefs?
And before you say “just because I voted for Obama doesn’t mean I advocate everything liberal” I would like to point out that what that does show is you put the War in Iraq as the the most important political issue. By doing this you lessened the significance of all other, equally important issues. Yes, it is easy to put this as a top issue because lives are something we can count. We can look at the facts and figures and completely understand them. This makes it harder for us to stand against abortion because many argue a fetus is not a human (ironically the same way Southerners argued African Americans weren’t humans), and even harder to measure how wrong homosexuality is because we don’t know how to measure sin. Also I understand how believing your persident and administration lied to you could also stray you away, but once again I say don’t let this stray you away from conservative values as a whole!
Realizing this message is way longer than I intended, and that I haven’t responded to all of your message I’m going to try to make this last part short! Let me remid you the Republican party is the one that advocates off-shore drilling on our own territory! Which would lessen our dependency on foreign countries! Also, I’m very disappointed you are for liberal taxation and welfare. Yes, many rich people have way too much money than they know what to do with and while taxing them more may make sense on the surface in reality it doesn’t! Sorry but you can’t have a capitalist society with socialist regulation. Capitalism allows those people to get where they are and because we are a capitalists society (well maybe not in a few years) we need to accept the products of capitalism. Also, you talk of greed. But just because certain people make more money it doesn’t automatically make them greedy. Yes some are but the beauty of capitalism is that it channels greed into something useful to the people. It forces them to come up with better, more efficient and reliable products that will be better for consumers! And if you have a problem with how much money they make lets look at why they make it. They make money because they produce products or services that people want or need (usually its the latter). So, if this is how they make their money, than doesn’t this reflect society? Doesn’t it tells us we need to be less materialistic and that WE are the reason for their great success and perhaps their greed? And also, often many of these rich people give back to society in enormous ways. Bill Gates gives more money to charity than you can imagine. Starbucks (thanks to Howard Schultz) is responsible for some of the largest community service projects the US has seen. Yes, I’m sure they would be fine if taxes went up a bit but what would that tell society about success? If anyone is greedy it is the government. They say to entrepreneurs “you have become too successful therefore you must give more money to us”. Let me point out one last thing. When people have freedom to do what they want with their money it gives them opportunity to CHOOSE to give that money away. But if the government intervenes and says you HAVE to give this money away it not only makes those people angry but also makes them less willing to give. And when less wealthy people receive that money (assuming it even gets to them) by means of things like welfare it makes them less responsible, unthankful, GREEDY, and gives them a sense of entitlement. They stay bitter towards the rich believing government is the solution to their lack of success. In reality, government is an unnecessary intermediary in the gift of giving because they assume the American people will only keep for themselves and be, as you said, greedy. I don’t know about you, Scott, but I have more faith in the American people (no matter how rich or poor) than
that!
As much as I want to go on I feel this message is already long enough. Can’t wait to hear back and I apologize for going on so long!
Both of your arguments are compelling. Greed is universal. The difference between conservatives and liberals is the issue of who is in the position of control. Big business can certainly succumb to greed, but as Aaron eloquently argued so too can big government. Neither are willing to transfer control to the masses. Therein lies the tension in a democracy. It is the masses that are allegedly given the control for their liberty and future.
Lisa mentioned being one of a few Christians in her high school in New Zealand. Growing up in Canada, I was the only Christian (I knew of) in a school of 1200 students. It’s a real challenge to your faith. In the end I discovered that it strengthened my resolve as a disciple of Christ.
Thanks for your stories.