My son Mike, a marine stationed in Germany, and I have been discussing the 'state of the world' and the economic crisis that seems to be nearing...and have come to the conclusion that the fate of the world rests upon the answer to this question:
Is Robin Hood a hero or a criminal?
Everyone knows the story of Robin Hood, who stole from the rich to give to the poor. He was the hero that lived in Sherwood Forest with his band of merry men, and saved the kingdom of England from the wicked Sheriff of Nottingham. Robin Hood and his men would threaten the lives of the rich who passed by (they did have swords, after all), and stole their money. They justified their actions because the rich were wicked, and they were giving the stolen money to the poor. In the story, and movies, Robin Hood was a hero who saved England.
So, the question is, was Robin Hood a hero or a criminal?
If YOU were sitting on a jury, and Robin Hood was on trial for stealing, would you convict him of a crime, or would you let him go, because of WHY he was stealing?
Well, is Robin Hood innocent or guilty of a crime?
If you believe that Robin Hood is innocent, you are morally corrupt, the society in which you live is in danger, and the world is in danger....
Sounds rather harsh, doesn't it? Don't we all tend to lean toward seeing Robin Hood as a hero, and letting him go free of any crime? But by so doing, we are actually acting on the belief that the ends justify the means--one of the most subtle, but devastating devices of Satan. If it is OK to steal to feed my family, or because my child is sick, or maybe my neighbor needs the money, or someone else just as deserving... where does it stop? And who is it that is morally pure enough to determine what 'end' properly justifies the means to get there? Can I kill, or commit adultery, or lie, or break any of the moral laws, because I feel the end result would be a good one?
As difficult as it is to see people suffer, is it ever morally right to practice 'the end justifies the means'?
How does Robin Hood relate to the condition of the world? It is the practice of almost all governments to steal from the rich to give to the poor!
In the book 'The Law' by the Frenchman Bastiat (one of the books everyone should read, along with the Bible and the Book of Mormon), gives a very clear and easy way to look at the world, and specifically governments:
His premise was this:
No government should do anything that would be morally wrong for a person to do.
If it is wrong for a person to lie, then it is wrong for the government to lie.
If it is wrong for a person to steal, then it is wrong for the government to steal, etc.
Seems simple enough, doesn't it? But now, think about Robin Hood...
If it is morally wrong for Robin Hood to steal, even if it is to give to the poor, then it is just as immoral for the government to take someones money and give it to someone else, regardless of the reason or 'end', that is always professed to be good.
If it is wrong for my neighbor to stick a gun in my face and take my money because he firmly believes he needs the money more than I do, then it is wrong for the government to take my money by threatening my life (with jail or other threats of force), because those in power believe that someone else needs the money, or is more deserving, than I am. This is the basis for all socialized programs.
Socialism is just the legalization of Robin Hood throughout society. Governments all over the world are now stealing from one group of people and giving their money to another group of people. Which people receive, and which ones are stolen from are totally arbitrary--it just depends on who is in power at the time. The decision of who gets the money taken--who is deserving--changes over time and place (proof in and of itself that the moral justification for doing this is baseless).
So there you are. Robin Hood really is the key to understanding the fall of civilizations. Do we become nations of immoral thieves (the end NEVER justifies the means), or can we actually see through the deception to realize that there is never a moral reason to commit immoral acts?
Food for thought!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
SemperI would take a slightly different take on "The Hood."
Robin was in charge of an insurgency against an evil and corrupt regime..."The Sheriff, et al" and stole from the illegitimate ruling class in order to feed his guerrilla army, thus his crimes were committed during a wartime environment and covered by the predecessor of the Geneva Convention.
On a more serious note...IMHO NO crime is justified...period. Our governments do tax us beyond a reasonable degree, but to use that as a basis for individuals to commit the same crime against someone is not comparable. We have alternative measures to rectify a situation of that magnitude, such as who we vote for, courts, etc., no matter how slow they may be.
Now if we are talking about corrupt regimes throughout the world, then I am all for removing them by any means necessary. Having lived/worked in developing countries for the majority of my adult life, I have seen how these evil regimes keep their people in poverty, all for the sake of their own greedy kleptocracy.
In regards to socialism...wealth redistribution, etc. NOT on my watch. We have a very strong sector of our society who wish to do just that...of course with them in charge. Again IMHO, taxes should be set at a fixed rate for ALL & should only be taxed ONE time, i.e. why tax a retirement pension, the military's pay, etc., when it is derived from tax dollars to begin with.
Why should someone who works the hardest be taxed more, just because they earn more? This philosophy would turn our society into a bunch of slackers.
Post a Comment