Viewing 1 - 1 out of 1 Blogs.

This may be an extreme understatement but I believe there is are serious discrepancies in what Mormon Church doctrine teaches and the political stance of the majority of members of the church. I apologize in advance for the lengthiness of this post, but its been on my mind a lot lately, so if you make it though the whole thing bravo!

I understand that for the most part the church proclaims it does not get involved in politics (which, is a disengagement claim as it funds right wing talk radio), but I see serious conflicts in what is taught in the church compared to the dominant political ideology of the Mormon people.

For example: The Mormon doctrine called the "law of consecration" administered under the United Order is taught by the LDS church to be the higher law, and "tithing" is the lower law. Comparable to Old Testament vs. New Testament. The law of consecration basically explains that everyone must give all their money to be equally distributed throughout the society.

In 1875, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles issued a Proclamation on the Economy; here is an exert:

Shouldn't the fundamental idea of the members of the church be to work towards redistributing their wealth throughout society.

In 1901 Utah had 100 socialists occupying political offices throughout Utah. In 1917 LDS apostle David O McKay stated in a conference that "It looks as if Russia will have a government 'by the people, of the people, and for the people." (April 7, 1917 Conference Report).

So basically I am confused as to why such a dramatic difference in official church doctrine and the ideology of right wing, ultra-conservative beliefs of the majority of the LDS members. I guess this can be transferred to the Christian right as a whole, but it seems more predominant in Utah.

Shouldn't a true Christian believe in universal health care, and true economic equality for all. Didn't Jesus teach that it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it would be for a rich person to enter heaven, and the first thing Jesus told his apostles was to redistribute their wealth to the poor and serve them? I don't recall any conditions on these doctrines, like saying "The poor people are lazy, or people will take advantage of a system that provides equally to all."

"You would have classes established here, some very poor and some very rich. Now, the Lord is not going to have anything of that kind. There has to be an equality; and we have to observe these principles that are designed to give every one the privilege of gathering around him the comforts and conveniences of life.” Lorenzo Snow (Journal of Discourses 19:349)

"It is not given that one man should possess that which is above another" (Doctrine and Covenants 49:20).

"Appoint unto this people their portions, every man equal according to his family, according to his circumstances and his wants and needs" (Doctrine and Covenants 51:3).

"That now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality" (2 Corinthians 8:14).

"And they had all things common among them; therefore there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift" (4 Nephi 1:3).

[Mat 19:21] Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

[Luke 1:53] He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away.

[Mark 10:21] Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven.

While the Christian right and most LDS Members rail against socialism they are in fact benefiting in many ways from socialist reforms in the United States. For instance under true capitalism there would be no minimum wage, or workers rights or safety programs such as OSHA. We would go back to the days when children were working 16 hour days in the factories, because if thats what the free market wants who is the government to get involved and say its wrong.

In many conversations people will cite things like Communist Russia, or the National Socialist Party of Germany, which is blatantly disingenuous. It is the same argument people use to say all Mormons are Polygamists who marry their underage cousins because thats what the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints does... and hey, they both say Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Again, all I am saying is the teachings of Christ, and the actual doctrine of the Church call for redistribution of wealth and economic equality. Capitalism allows a small minority of rich white males to dictate the living conditions and economic condition of the majority of the world, and without socialist reforms such as the establishment of basic working standards and a liveable wage, this small minority is an undemocratic tyranny depriving the poor from true freedom.

True Capitalism in Practice
Look for instance at economies that have operated under true laissez-faire economics. Chile for instance is a perfect example if you look at the US sponsored overthrow of democratically elected socialist president Salvador Allende and the installment of a military dictator Augusto Pinochet.

If you want to see an example of true free market capitalism take a look at Chile under Pinochet. It was lauded as an "economic miracle" by Margaret Thatcher and the US for its change from socialism to a free market system under Pinochet.

While Pinochet was in power from 1973 and 1990 , there were large cuts to incomes and social services. Wages decreased by 8%. Family allowances in 1989 were 28% of what they had been in 1970 and the budgets for education, health and housing had dropped by over 20% on average. 5% of the population received 25% of the total national income in 1972, it received 50% in 1975. Wage and salary earners got 64% of the national income in 1972 but only 38% at the beginning of 1977. Malnutrition affected half of the nation's children, and 60% of the population could not afford the minimum protein and food energy per day. Infant mortality also increased sharply. Cumulative cuts in health funding totaled 60% between 1973 and 1988. The cuts indirectly caused a significant rise in many preventable diseases and mental health problems. These included rises in typhoid (121%,) viral hepatitis, and an increase in the frequency and seriousness of mental ailments among the unemployed.

Since the restoration of democracy Chile has favored the socialist party and both Ricardo Lagos and Michelle Bachelet (the past two presidents) are both members of the socialist party. Since the socialists took power the economy has improved as they increasing have abandoned the old free market policies of the dictatorship, which has been a slow transition but a transition supported by the people.

That said Chile still has not experienced true socialist economic reform, but it has favored socialist economic reforms as do the majority of Latin American countries in response to US interventionism and neo-liberal free market exploitation that has plagued the continent.


Why Socialism?
Socialism is based on the idea that we should use the vast resources of society to meet people’s needs.

It seems so obvious--if people are hungry, they should be fed; if people are homeless, we should build homes for them; if people are sick, the best medical care should be available to them. A socialist society would take the immense wealth of the rich and use it to meet the basic needs of all society. The money wasted on weapons could be used to end poverty, homelessness, and all other forms of scarcity.

Under socialism, the majority of people would plan democratically what to do and how do it as the means of production--the factories, offices, mines, and so on--would be owned by all of society.

In order for planning to work, a socialist society must be democratic--much more so than the current system. Democracy and capitalism don’t really go hand in hand. In fact, repressive dictatorships run many so-called models of the free market in less developed countries. Even in countries that brag about how democratic they are, democracy is limited to electing representatives to government every two or four years.

Unfortunately, the record of the former USSR, China, and other so-called socialist countries has created the impression that socialism is a top-down society run by party bosses. This has nothing to do with genuine socialism--or, for that matter, with the whole experience of working-class struggle. Socialism will be democratic in a more fundamental way.

All that believed were together, and had all things in common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
(Acts 2:44-45)

And behold, thou wilt remember the poor, and consecrate of thy properties for their support that which thou hast to impart unto them, with a covenant and a deed which cannot be broken. (D&C 42:30)

For it shall come to pass, that which I spake by the mouths of my prophets shall be fulfilled; for I will consecrate of the riches of those who embrace my gospel among the Gentiles unto the poor of my people who are of the house of Israel. (D&C 42:39)

Therefore, if any man shall take of the abundance which I have made, and impart not his portion, according to the law of my gospel, unto the poor and the needy, he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment. (D&C 104:18)

Wo unto you rich men, that will not give your substance to the poor, for your riches will canker your souls; and this shall be your lamentation in the day of visitation, and of judgment, and of indignation: The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and my soul is not saved! (D&C 56:16)