Archive for the 'Walmart' Category

Oct11

Is Walmart Evil? - Part V The Fruit of True Capitalism

PaulTN

The departure from true capitalism took place a long time ago. The effects of that departure were not as blatant then as they are now. It would be hard to consider Rockefeller hiring a sodomite consulting firm to help him through the “image crisis” he faced with Standard Oil in Texas.

However, the root of the problems experienced in today’s post Christian culture were found in the culture and the lives of the men of this time. The root grew and was feed several different ways; economically, through paper currency; philosophically, by an apostate church; and socially, by men without chests; that is to say men who chose money over morals, men who had neither the desire or ability to stand for what was right.

Some have argued that the differences were epitomized between the north and the south in the war between the states and that in fact the last vestiges of true capitalism disappeared with the defeat of the south and the capitulation of her sons to the ideas of industrial capitalism.

Regardless of the cause or the advancement of this philosophy, industrial capitalism has shaped our nation and made it what it is today. In an attempt to show the fruit of true capitalism as a contrast we will not look so much at the idea of philanthropy because it is not known for giving away great sums of money. Although the idea of helping those in need is so much a part of life that it is not something tracked or a social indicator at all. It is simply a way of life, found when people have strong families and live in community with one another. So if so called philanthropy is a hallmark of industrial capitalism, then families and communities would be the hallmark of true capitalism.

Here is a great introduction to the concept of true capitalism from; The United States Since 1865, Fourth Edition Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc 1949. This is the opening of Chapter 9 The New Agriculture:

In many regions, the American farming community before the Civil War - like all those from the beginning of time-had been a complete microcosm in itself. Food, wearing apparel, all the essentials for its self-perpetuation, the agricultural community had produced itself or by the simple agency of barter had obtained at first hand. The local blacksmith shod the horses and made the nails, the local tanner cured the leather for footgear and harnesses, the local butcher slaughtered the animals for the farmer’s table. Lumber was obtained from the wood lot, vegetables were grown in the kitchen garden, bread for the table came from the wheat field, the corn needed for the fattening of the barn animals was homegrown, wool from the backs of the sheep made the homespun articles of clothing, butter was churned in the home dairy. The simple primitive tools-the plow, the sickle, the cradle, and the flail-were heritages from a past whose origins were so remote that changing their forms would have necessitated as complete a revolution in attitude as brought on, let us say, the protestant Reformation.

This author has marked the Civil War as the death of true capitalism which he describes very well. The other fact pointed out which is often disputed today is that our nation was distinctly rural until the rise of industrial capitalism.

Again to turn to Sobel:

“The presence of such merchants and small manufacturers should not lead one to believe there was a thriving urban life in the Colonies. [American Colonies prior to the War for Independence] There was no census in this period. The first such counting took place in 1790, at which time there were 3.9 million Americans, 3.7 million of whom lived in areas considered rural, which is to say they were farmers. Of the 202,000 who lived in “urban” areas, only 62,000 were in places with a population of between 25,000 and 50,000. A majority of Americans would live on farms in the nineteenth century as well. As late as 1900, there were three rural Americans for every two urban dwellers. The America that would emerge from the Revolution was populated by farmers, those who fabricated goods from farm products, and others who carried them to markets or created the means to do so. Such was America in its rural age.”

“The Pursuit of Wealth, The Incredible Story of Money Throughout the Ages” - Robert Sobel McGraw-Hill 1999

By now your probably saying, “That sounds a lot like agrarianism?” and you’d be on the right track if you did. But capitalism is really more than living off the land. Although the fruit of true capitalism is that people own their land. They work the land, and the land provides for their needs. They may not be professional farmers, but at very least they are freeholders. They are self sufficient and for the basics of life, that is survival in the rough times, they depend on no one outside their own family farm and possibly a couple close friends or neighbors in the larger community. Imagine what this kind of dependence does to the relationships in these rural areas.

I’ll give just one more glimpse into the time period of the early 1800s as an example of what true capitalism looked like in retrospect. This one from one of my all time favorite pieces, John G. Paton Missionary to the New Hebrides - First Part, Hodder And Stroughton 1890.

As a point of interest, John G Paton was born in 1824 in south Scotland 10 years or so before the triumvirate of Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Morgan. He was a contemporary who chose a very different path, he gave his life in service to the people on the islands of New Hebrides as a missionary. ( A tribute to God’s hand upon his work and one could say his Biblical philanthropy (although it was not administered in money) is the fact that to this day according to the CIA’s web site the islands are still 80% Christian in their religion. When Paton first visited the island of Tanna in the mid 1800s they were 100% cannibals. - A must read, if you haven’t seen it.) In the opening of his life story he gives us a glimpse of the world he grew up in and the changes that occurred in the move towards industrialization. Chapter 1 Page 5:

At that time, about 1830, Torthorwald was a busy and thriving village, and comparatively populous, with its cottars and crofters, large farmers and small farmers, weavers and shoemakers, cloggers and coopers, blacksmiths and tailors….

….The Villagers of my early days - the agricultural servants, or occasional labourers, the tradesmen, the small farmers - were, generally speaking, a very industrious and thoroughly independent race of people. Hard workers they had to be, else they would starve; yet they were keen debaters on all affairs both in Church and State…

… (Page 9) There amid this wholesome and breezy village life, our dear parents found their home for the long period of forty years….making in all a family of five sons and six daughters.

Our home consisted of a “but” and a “ben” and a “mid room”, or chamber, called the “closet”. The one end was my mother’s domain, and served all the purposes of dining-room and kitchen and parlour, besides containing two large wooden erections, called by our Scotch peasantry “box-beds”; not holes in the wall, as in cities, but grand, big airy beds, adorned with many-coloured counterpanes and hung with natty curtains, showing the skill of the mistress of the house. The other end was my father’s workshop, filled with five or six “stocking frames”, whirring with the constant action of five or six pairs of busy hands and feet, and producing right genuine hosiery for the merchants at Hawick and Dumfries.

The “closet” was a very small apartment betwixt the other two, having room only for a bed, a little table, and a chair, with a diminutive window shedding diminutive light on the scene. This was the Sanctuary of that cottage home. Thither daily, and oftentimes a day, generally after each meal, we saw our father retire, and “shut to the door”; and we children got to understand by a sort of spiritual instinct (for the thing was too sacred to be talked about) that prayers were being poured out there for us, as of old by the High Priest within the veil in the Most Holy Place. We occasionally heard the pathetic echoes of a trembling voice pleading as if for life, and we learned to slip out and in past that door on tiptoe, not to disturb the holy colloquy. The outside world might not know, but we knew, whence came that happy light as of a new-born smile that always was dawning on my father’s face: it was the reflection from the Divine Presence, in the consciousness of which he lived. Never, in temple or cathedral, on mountain or in glen, can I hope to feel that the Lord God is more near, more visibly walking and talking with men, than under that humble cottage roof of thatch and oaken wattles.

Here in these few paragraphs we capture what epitomizes the idea of true capitalism in three parts. First, the town was small, and secondly a busy and industrious place. It was a place where the people worked hard and crafted goods to meet the needs of their neighbors with excellence.

Secondly, the family was a place of Biblical order, with biblically defined roles for both men and women. Make a special note here of the shallowness of the modern cry of the feminist against a woman’s place being in the home. In true capitalism we have both mother, father, and all the children in the home, working together. The home is a place of industry. It might be noted that without each person fulfilling their own duties the family would not survive, economically or physically.

Lastly, point 3, the father led his family. He was not a figure head, but in fact actively came before God with the needs of his family and led each one of them into their own walk with God and directed them in their walk in life. This is more attested to in previous posts about this book, but is also seen in these quotes above. Read here for more info on the Paton family relations.

If one contrasts the life of James Paton with that of Sam Walton we can see the fruit of the work they were involved in. If we left the individual analysis out of this and strictly compared their lives based on the time they lived and the work they were involved in we might also see a glimpse of a comparison between the two philosophies being discussed. (Fully understanding we can never actually remove the individual aspect. But in an attempt to be kind and give Sam Walton the benefit of the doubt. Pretend he was just as good of a Christian man as James Paton)

The fruit of John G Paton’s life has been mentioned and his siblings were very remarkable as well, but what of the children of Sam Walton. With all the wealth ever needed, literally more money then the GDP of 90%+ of the nations in the world what have they accomplished for the good of society? Do they even serve the God of their father? Has anyone heard of anything that they have done with this fortune that would honor God or serve their fellow man?

There is no desire to be unkind here, just simply an honest comparison of what these variations of capitalism produce. The fruit in the families is only one comparison. The economy these ideas create and prosper in, or the effect they have on the larger society have yet to be considered. This will be forthcoming, by God’s grace.

But as a summary, the fruit of industrial capitalism is:

  • A work place that removes father and mother from the home
  • A government funded education system that socialises the children to be good producers for the industries
  • An androgynous society where neither men nor women have specific roles to play or a purpose to fill - Each are interchangeable
  • Marriage is not valued or needed, divorce rates sore, abortion, child abuse and neglect rise
  • Money is the solution for all things and the measuring stick by which all things are judged
  • Reckless giving of great sums of money
  • Great amount of debt and voluntary enslavement

In contrast the fruit of true capitalism:

  • Properly ordered home and society
  • Divorce rates are low and the family is respected and revered
  • The home is the place of industry and education
  • Biblical order is the judge of success not money
  • A close community provides for the crisis needs of a family and brings accountability
  • Land ownership and freedom are the norm

Imagine what our modern lives might look like, if we owed no money, lived and worked with the ones we love, and enjoyed the friendship of others who shared our beliefs. That in a nutshell is true capitalism. Next how does this effect the economy, both locally and nationally.

2 Comments »Walmart, Corporate America, Reading list, Agrarian Life

Sep30

Is Walmart Evil? - Part IV The Fruit of Industrial Capitalism

PaulTN

The Fruit of Industrial Capitalism

Perhaps industrial capitalism is more easily seen in the fruit of it’s labor. One could quickly point to the recent Walmart debacle and a dozen others like it. But if we look back to the beginning we see from the inception the same patterns. Think quickly of three of the greatest “capitalist” in American history. Who comes to mind? I’m not talking about the modern day Bill Gates and Warren Buffet types, although with all their giving to the abortion industry I think they make the case very nicely as well.

But likely, if you thought for just a moment your mind would wonder to the names of Carnegie, Rockefeller, JP Morgan and the like. For good reason, these men became men of great wealth. What is an interesting and little considered fact is that all three of these men begin their careers just prior to the war between the states. Each of them born within a four year period in the 1830’s managed to position themselves prior to the war in such a manner as to come out of the war with the capitol and means to build the businesses that made them the household names they are today.

So why do we remember them, and for what should they be remembered? Do we speak the name of Carnegie and talk about the 30-40 junior partners he made millionaires when he sold National Steel? Do we talk about how JP Morgan made Carnegie the richest man in the world when he bought National Steel for $492 million in 1900? When we talk of Morgan do we think of the fact that he combined 170 different companies together to form US Steel, a company worth around $700 million at that time. Do we marvel at the vast oil holdings of John D. Rockefeller?

I would submit that these are the very reasons these men are remembered. It is not because of the Carnegie Foundation, or the Rockefeller Trust. It is not because they were great philanthropist, but because they were the pioneers of industrial capitalism. Their notoriety is due to the great fortunes they amassed not the money they gave away. Many may point to the great sums of money they have passed on through their trusts and foundations as a sign of their virtue. But if that giving is examined in light of scripture, it may be found wanting.

Crimes of Philanthropy

RL Dabney spoke clearly to this issue in his essay The Crimes of Philanthropy. He made the case that as sinful man we often do the wrong things for the right reasons and the right things for the wrong reasons. Using Carnegie as an example, he had a heart to give back to society and redistribute the wealth he had accumulated. However, Carnegie was subject to the passions and teachings of his times, namely the Socialism in the political realm and Unitarianism in the church. Each of these effected him and his giving in such a way that Dabney would have called it a crime rather than a gift.

If we start with the reformed doctrine of the depravity of man and believe the catechisms that state man’s chief end is to glorify God and we further contrast these views with the goals and fruit of Socialism and Unitarianism we can see where the crime is committed. Both of these institutions remove the emphasis from God and place it on man. As such Carnegie’s giving was to help his fellow man, not to glorify the God who created him.

The result of giving with the goal of helping man, without bringing glory to God, is that it ultimately does not help man. In fact a case could be made that to lift a man from poverty without pointing him towards God will cause greater harm still. If we bring this back to Walmart and the Sam Walton foundation we see the causes they are supporting are civil interests such as government programs and public schools. These it can be argued do not help the public interest, but only further the interests of the government many times at the expense of the people’s liberty which we discussed in previous posts.

The second challenge in this debacle is the fact that Carnegie and other’s like him considered themselves Christian men. Again, as was stated about Sam Walton, ultimately that must be left to God. But we can look to the fruit of their lives and the worldview in which they operated to discern if there were Christian principles at work worth imitating. If a review is done on Carnegie’s The Gospel of Wealth, is sounds much more like a socialist rant than a Christian philosophy of giving. Every principle put forth is in direct opposition to a basic biblical principle. (That is a story for another day.)

The point in this comparison, is these men and others of that era laid the foundation for Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Conrad Hilton, and yes even the recently defamed Sam Walton. There is a pervasive philosophy that grants an appearance of Christianity but denies the substance there of. There is an order of business that brings financial prosperity without considerations for the order of the universe or the God who created it.

In short we ascribe the descriptor “Christian” to people because they go to church or claim the name of Christ, without examining the fruit of their lives. We as a culture have separated and compartmentalised our lives into the secular and the religious. It is this prevailing philosophy in the church that allows us to call men like Sam Walton “good Christian men” without regards to the fruit of the business they engaged in.

If one makes the claim that “God blessed Sam Walton”, then one must also make the claim that God judged and destroyed the small town where I grew up in rural Arkansas. (and thousands of others across the nation) Because as Walmart opened it’s doors most of the other little mom and pop shops that supported many good “Christian” families were shut down as they tried to compete with the high cost of low price.

If this is the case than one must say that God paid Sam Walton to destroy these small family run businesses and if we look at the balance sheets we can see that God pays very well for this kind of work. It would be hard to seriously make this claim. However, that is the claim made when folks try to say God blessed Sam Walton and that he was a good Christian man.

There is more that needs to be considered as this is studied. To understand how this happened and the principles behind it we must understand the difference in the local economy and the national economy and the biblical examples of decentralization must be considered.

2 Comments »Walmart, Corporate America, Reading list, Agrarian Life

Sep29

Is Walmart Evil? - Part III Capitalism verse Industrial Capitalism

PaulTN

The Difference Between Capitalism and Industrial Capitalism 

After my long “discussion” on the lack of a Biblical foundation for the notion of federally authorized and created entity or “persons” commonly called corporations, I want to be clear that I am not against people making money.  I’m not against capitalism as a political / economic system, I am very much in favor of true capitalism.  However, what I see changing the face of the America I grew up in, is the Industrial Capitalism planted in seed form before the war between the states.  The difference is a true free market economy verses a system where every big business has such a symbiotic relationship with the government that it might as well be communism.

Just as a reminder, for those of us who are government educated, Communism, at its roots, is government control over the tools of production.  It is interesting to note that Communism is a response to the dangers of Industrial Capitalism; the “bourgeois”.  It did not come about until the 19th century when Industrial Capitalism was on the rise and its chief complaints are against the fruits of Industrial Capitalism (IC), not traditional Capitalism.  While The Communist Manifesto correctly identifies many of the weaknesses of IC, it posits a solution that leads to less freedom and a stronger state.  (Not a position that tends to advance liberty!) 

So then, what is the difference between Capitalism and Industrial Capitalism?  It would be trite to say that it is a sole proprietorship verse a corporation, but it is.  But it is much more than that. 

  • It is a philosophy as well as an economic discipline
  • It is a nation of families, verses a nation of individuals
  • It is community, verses nationalism
  • It is Calvinism, verses Unitarianism
  • It is filling a need, verses marketing a good
  • It is traditionalism, verses progressivism
  • It is free market, verses government control
  • It is agrarian, verses industrialism
  • It is gold currency, verses paper notes
  • It is small town shops, verses large scale production

It is all these things and so much more.

Robert Sobel in The Pursuit of Wealth speaks to one aspect of this.  In the chapter “Emperor Wheat and King Cotton”, he states:

“One historian, Eugene Genovese, in some of his works, most notably The Political Economie of Slavery, has argued persuasively that the southern frame of mind was precapitalist.  While northern businessmen were concerned about maximizing their wealth, southern cotton planters, while hoping to live graciously, were more interested in preserving their way of life.” (emphasis not in the original)

I think this quote sums it up fairly well, in that the difference between capitalism (which he calls pre-capitalism) and industrial capitalism is a different approach to life.  One says, “it’s the economy stupid”, the other says some things just aren’t for sale.  It’s a matter of priorities.  One says that if I can just make a little more money, then I can buy the things my family “needs”.  The other says, the more time I spend making money the more my family needs things that can not be bought.

This captures the heart of the difference between industrial capitalism and true capitalism.  It would be a great study to compare each of these items one by one.  But perhaps the more telling study will be to contrast the fruit of the industrial capitalism as a whole to the fruit of true capitalism.  We’ll begin to take a look at the fruit of industrial capitalism next.

3 Comments »Economics, Josiah Project, Walmart, Corporate America, Agrarian Life

Sep14

Is Walmart Evil? - Part II Corporations Continued

PaulTN

A few more lingering thoughts on corporations before we get to Capitalism.

A corporation is a creature of the state in every sense of the word. It must have the blessing of the state to exist. It must play by the rules of the state according to the industry it competes in. Depending on the industry, it is subject to governmental control through regulations instituted by departments such as OSHA, ATF, the departments of the treasury, transportation, and agriculture, the FAA, The Surgeon Generals office and any number of other governmental offices that have a measure of authority over most of the corporations in operation today. If you want to see where your tax dollars are at work, check this site out for a fairly exhaustive list of governmental agencies.

If you add to this direct control the national aspect of corporations and the huge sums of money that flow through the boards of these organizations, you see another connection between the government and the corporations, that of mutual financial benefit. If you have any doubts of this, revisit the details behind Enron, or any of these telling articles:

Two last points on corporations. According to The Pursuit of Wealth, by Robert Sobel, Corporations are a means to control the competition that threaten the business people’s existence. They evolved from pools and trust, a la The Sherman Anti-Trust act, and where originally called holding companies. They were a vehicle used to buy up competition and transportation positions that would squeeze out the competition’s ability to transport their products, specifically on railroads.

When they arrived on the scene corporations where not received by everyone with joy. Senator William Lindsay of Kentucky cautioned the members of the American Academy of Political and Social Science in 1900,

“We have reached the point at which the individual feels he can no longer compete with his incorporated rival, and where members of old-line partnerships are no longer willing to pledge their personal credit in competition with members of incorporated companies.”

In other words, the corporations were killing the small business. Walmart anyone? We’ll have to come back to that thought, but has anyone seen the gutted downtown areas of America’s small towns where Walmart has come in?

So how were the corporations able to get the upper financial hand? After all it’s just men running the organization. What makes it superior to a family business or local partnership?

One of the ways they out distanced the individual businessmen, was the means of raising capitol. A corporation can raise funds via a more liquid assets in the form of stock and they could do so beyond the actual value of the assets of the corporation. People would (and still do) pay a premium on the stock price based on what they believe the company will do in the future. First, just strictly from a biblical perspective, this is called gambling or speculation. I think one could make a strong case that this is not acceptable for a Christian.

Let me be clear, investing is where you purchase part of a company’s tangible assets and become a part owner in the company. There is hope for the future, but value for today. If the company goes under, you can sell the assets and receive your original funds back. (barring other risks) Gambling is where you pay for part of a company that is valued beyond it’s assets with the hope it will preform in the years to come. If this company goes bankrupt, there are not enough assets to pay the shareholders and you loose most of what you put up.

Back in the late 1800’s they called this process stock watering and according to Sobel, “to prudent investors of that day this seemed tantamount to fraud.”

“Depriving a [corporation] of its stock-watering feature,” surmised Senator Lindsay, “is almost the same as depriving a venomous serpent of its fangs.”

We are so steeped in the language of corporations, let me give an example of what this might look like in a partnership. The richest man in Babylon comes to me and wants me to invest with him in some fine Persian rugs. The rugs can be purchased in bulk in Persia for 100 talents of gold per 100 rugs. The rugs currently sale for 2 talents apiece here in Babylon. The risks are, theft, damage in shipment (camel trips and falls), another supplier comes and loads the market with better rugs, or cheaper rugs, etc…

Now, we have the same situation, but the rugs are currently selling for 1 talent a rug and we are buying them at 1 talent a rug. However, the richest man says, hey I have an inside tip and I know that there is going to be this huge rug seminar to teach people about how superior Persian rugs are and the prince has promised to buy one from us so we know everyone is going to be wanting a rug, so I’m certain we can sell these rugs for 2 talents apiece. This is called speculation… it’s called gambling.

All business has risk, but not all business investment is speculation.

Of course, what the corporations can do with this capitol is the point, not the individual responsibilities with investments. With it they can control prices, endure hard times, and drive every competitor they desire out of business. Remember this was the original reason for the creation of these companies; to control the competition.

After they remove the local family store, the corporations remove the money from the local market and place it in the hands of a few men to distribute as they see fit. This is re-distribution of wealth. This is one of my chief complaints against Walmart. Every dollar spent in their store goes directly to Bentonville AR. Money spent in a local store will support and benefit 5 to 8 neighbors before it leaves the community.

Here are a few links to bring this back home to Walmart:

Of course we should not miss the political giving. Even if they are giving to “conservative” organizations, they are buying benefits for them, not us. They are taking our money and giving it to causes which benefit them, not our family or our community. But, that’s what we can expect when we give our money and our business away to the lowest bidder.

Again, there is more to life than price. Wall Street may judge on numbers, but we have the capacity to discern between right and wrong.

Don’t forget to contact Walmart and let them know what you think.

http://walmartstores.com/GlobalWMStoresWeb/navigate.do?catg=224 - Contact Walmart

4 Comments »State, Economics, Josiah Project, Walmart, Corporate America, Agrarian Life

Sep05

Is Walmart Evil? - Part 1 Corporations

PaulTN

I have been on the outs with Walmart for a while now for many reasons. So when I began to receive numerous e-mail forwards about how we should boycott Walmart because they are supporting the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, I didn’t think twice about joining them. In fact our family is ahead of the curve on this one as we have not shopped at Walmart in many months for other reasons I’ll get to shortly. In fact I feel a multi-part series coming on to attempt to explain this all. I think this is how I will attempt to break it down over the next several posts.

  1. Corporations
  2. Capitalism vs. Industrial Capitalism
  3. Local Economy vs. national economy
  4. Decentralization - a Biblical model for all areas of life
  5. Foolishness of political parties as a divide and conquer method of control

(That is a rough estimate of the direction I would like to take this conversation. Bear with me, ask questions and add comments where I leave something out, I want to be sure this is covered thoroughly.)

One of the e-mails I received said Walmart is “betraying it’s Christian roots”. I would have to take exception with this notion. First Walmart is a corporation, not an individual, therefore it has no Christian roots. A corporation is not human and therefore not subject to the emotions, thoughts, and reasoning processes that are built into all humans. Most of all it is not subject to the rule of God in it’s heart. It does not have one. Because of this, it can not betray anything. In fact, a corporation can only do what it was designed to do; make money. So in this sense, Walmart is staying true to it’s roots. It is making profit at all cost.

This is also one of the downsides to not being human. It is not judged by it’s character, but by it’s profits.

Now the concerning issue which has everyone up in arms is the profits are now being used to push an agenda. Which has always been the life cycle of a corporation since Carnegie’s “Gospel of Wealth”. The chief problem now is that those pushing the agenda have no morals. Sam Walton may have been a good Christian man, (we’ll leave that to God to decide) but he left a legacy of destruction that is only beginning to be realised. A legacy, I’m going to claim, was inherent in the corporation at it’s inception.

This is one of the shortfalls of a corporation and one of the reasons, I would personally make the claim that they are unbiblical. If the leadership is not moral, there is nothing that will restrain the corporation. The shareholders, as long as they are profiting will not restrain it, the employees who are dependant on the income will not restrain it, and the government that is built with it’s profits and generosity, will not restrain it. (Does anyone remember Enron?) I like the way R.L. Dabney put it. He said, “A corporation doesn’t have a soul to damn or a butt to kick.”

The Bible speaks to all the principles we need to build our life in a Godly manner. If all we had was the Bible and we were building a nation, where would we get the idea that we needed an unaccountable entity to help us make money? I’m not talking about joint partnerships or trading partners. I think we could support, both by example and specific needs, from the scriptures. I am talking about the specific purpose of a corporation. Why do we have them?

I have set them up and understand the nature of them. I have participated in them and worked for them. But why do we need them? What do they provide that a man, his family, or his business partners could not provide? Does the lack of a document calling a group a corporation prevent them from producing or manufacturing goods? Does it keep them from hiring other people to help them? What is the number one reason given for setting up a corporation? According to corporation.com its to avoid government audits and provide protection against personal liability. I’m not completely sure these are good things.

(Another point I’ll try to discuss more in the next piece is the government control that comes with being a creature of the state.)

In addition, it provides a vehicle to perpetuate the wealth that it creates outside of the Biblical means of the family. It is a perpetual partnership where the partners change, but the wealth stays in the corporation. God in his wisdom, knew the good and the bad great wealth could create. As such in the normal state of affairs, that is to say according to the biblical model, all wealth is held in a family and the father as the patriarch had complete control and responsibility of it.

Here is a means to insure that the next generation, who would control the money and set the agenda, was going to use it morally. The purpose of the Christian family was and is to glorify God and honor his commands. It is the father’s responsibility to train his family in these principles. If he failed in his training and the son was a rebellious man then he was disinherited and the father would pass on the wealth to someone who could manage it properly for the Glory of God. It should not be missed here that if a family as a whole became rebellious, then they would come under the judgement of God.

In the corporation, we do not have this control. In fact, the control of the money can be bought, which is common place today with buyouts and take overs. But the key difference is, there is not an individual who is going to be held accountable for how the wealth is used. Honoring God and bringing him glory is not part of the charter of a corporation. If it is part of the paper charter, it is not what it will be judged by. Wall Street only judges by the numbers. Again, the corporation is set up to make money and the only restraint placed upon it is that of the joint moral conscience or the board as pressured by the stock holders and legislated by the government. There is no ultimate accountability.

So here are the key points to the issue with corporations.

  1. They are not human - incapable of character
  2. They are set up solely to make money
  3. They are used to push social agendas
  4. They are not a biblical entity
  5. They shield those who make bad decision from being held accountable by the one’s they cause harm to
  6. They provide a perpetual means of controlling wealth outside of the biblical model of the family

We’ll continue this thread in a future post and discuss the difference between Capitalism and the Industrial Capitalism that came to fullness through the war for southern independence. In the mean time here is the information to contact Walmart and let them know how you feel about them working with The National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce.

15 Comments »State, Economics, Josiah Project, Walmart, Reading list, Agrarian Life