“…the farm is a teacher of virtue and of the life devoted to freedom.” -Menander

Two nights ago we held our first official book discussion on the though-provoking book, Beyond Capitalism & Socialism edited by Tobias J. Lanz.

Click here to download the recording now. (Be patient with the download; it’s a big file.)

You’ll also enjoy this document, which features my review (including my response to Oliver DeMille’s review), notes taken during the discussion, and links to additional resources about all the concepts discussed.

The discussion will be difficult to follow if you haven’t read the book, so we urge you to snag a copy.

For those of you on the call, we had a glitch at the end that shut down the webinar right as I was about to close with this quote from Victor Davis Hanson in The Other Greeks: The Family Farm & The Agrarian Roots of Western Civilization:

“…where will be the needed counterpoint to our amoral philosophy, to our national ethos? Where will be the singular critic, the often unpleasant individual, the cratered veteran of a continual, a personal struggle with nature, the cultural dissident who will still choose to go it alone in order to protect the old notion of a community, who will have innate distrust for authoritarianism, large bureaucracy, and urban consensus? Where will be the person prerequisite to, the exemplar for, democratic and egalitarian government?

“…What are professions are there now in this country where the individual fights alone against nature, lives where he works, invests hourly for the future and never for the mere present, succeeds or fails by his own intellect, physical strength, bodily endurance, and sheer nerve? In what other vocation now does an American care so little about his own appearance, about the type of car he is to drive, about the title of the job he is to enjoy, about the status of his associates, and so much about the promptness of his action, the unambiguity of his intent, and the value of his promised word?

“Will our contemporary and abstract policy-making or learned philosophical discussion, will the novelists among us, will the American university professor and consultant of the day, will the institutionalized scholar, government planner, and academic theorist on the Left and Right, will they provide the needed counterpressure, the necessary barricade to the growing tyranny of a uniform, materialistic, urban, selfish, and ultimately Hellenistic culture?

“Or at long last, when we seek in vain for our lost American polis, will we look for it amid the ghosts of our own georgoi, now gone to a world beneath our feet?”

By Oliver DeMille

The message of this excellent book, Beyond Capitalism and Socialism, is straightforward and timely: both socialism and capitalism are lacking.

But the book goes a step further, offering suggestions for what type of economy and society we should adopt in the twenty-first century:

“There must be a better way. And, of course, there is, and has been for a very long time. It is a society based on small self-sufficient regions, empowered communities, vibrant neighborhoods, gainfully employed families, individual self-satisfactions, decentralized politics, local economies, sustainable organic agriculture, cooperative work, environmental humility, and careful nurturing of the earth.”

The entire book outlines these basic ideals in a realistic and real-world, even anti-utopian, way.

First, it notes that through history humankind has faced on ongoing series of major crises. These are simply the reality of history. Every generation faces challenges, and some are bigger than others.

We have enjoyed a period of relative peace and prosperity which is rare in human history. Crises of some kind will come, and at some point they will challenge or end the ability of big government to solve the world’s problems.

Second, the book argues that truly sustainable society depends on something more than dependence on big institutions:

“As James Kunstler puts it in The Long Emergency, when these [inevitable] crises hit, national and supranational economies will disintegrate and ‘the focus of society will have to return to the town or small city and its surrounding agricultural hinterland…’”

“It will require us to downscale and rescale virtually everything we do and how we do it…”

“Anything organized on the large scale, whether it is government or a corporate business enterprise such as Wal-Mart, will wither as the cheap energy props that support bigness fall away.”

This is an extremely important point. Towns and cities along with families could, and indeed should, at some point become once again the central institutions of human society. We have given far too little thought to this eventuality.

Third, if any or all of these changes—or others like them—occur, we will see our world drastically altered.

Unfortunately, little of our modern schooling, scholarship, career training or leadership preparation is geared in any way to dealing with such a possibility.

“And then, of necessity, the world will reconstruct itself on the lines of a more human-scale, community-based, local-resource-dependent societies…”

I don’t know if this forecast will come as predicted here, but it certainly could. And if it does, we need leaders who are prepared.

In fact, even if this prediction doesn’t occur, such an increase of leadership on local levels could only help our society.

Even if our major institutions remain big, even global, strong local leadership is vital to success—economically, politically and on a societal level.

It is the breakdown of exactly this kind of local leadership which has caused such drastic growth of institutions that are too big and such widespread dependence on these institutions.

Any organization that is too big to fail is, put simply, too big. Period. If it is too big to fail, its failure is a major threat—because all manmade institutions eventually fail. Most do so earlier rather than later.

The authors of Beyond Capitalism and Socialism get it right that the answer to our major current problems are rooted in our citizens and community, and that until we build strong local foundations across society we can only expect to witness further economic decay.

They are also correct that neither capitalism nor socialism hold the answers, that a return to true free enterprise is essential, and that we must get started in this process rather than wait for some crisis to force such changes.

At times the authors get caught up in denominational debates from the Catholic perspective, but this tends to deepen the benefit of the book rather than detract. Readers do not have to buy into any religious themes to learn from the numerous commentaries on the potential of free enterprise society.

The book is invaluable reading for American, and all freedom-loving, citizens. As one of the authors wrote:

“Given a society, in which men, or the vast majority of men, owned property and were secure in their income, the myriad interactions of free men making empowered choices really would balance supply and demand. We would be astonished at the variety, the non-servility, and the creativity of our neighbors.”

Still, I found the book lacking in one major detail.

I prefer the term “free enterprise” to “Distributive,” first because I think it more accurately describes the philosophy for which it stands and second because I’m not convinced that free enterprise and distributism are precisely the same thing.

They share many ideals, it is true, but there are differences. For example, both free enterprise and distributism agree that:

• neither capitalism nor socialism is the ideal

• capitalism, in which those with wealth are treated differently by the law than those without wealth and the level of one’s wealth determines which laws pertain to each person, is flawed

• socialism, in which the government owns the major means of production and levels incomes and work assignments in an attempt to create long-term equity between all citizens and where one’s status is determined by one’s government position, is flawed

• the local society, economy and government is more important than the state- or national-level economy and government and should be treated as such

• families are the central institution of society, and they are more important than markets or governments; markets and governments exist to help families, not vice versa

• money is an important consideration in making choices for family, career, business and society, but it is less of a priority than relationships, spirituality and morality

• we have reached a point in the modern world where our societal dependence on big institutions—both government and corporate—is a serious weakness in our culture and causes much that is negative in our world

• a return to society that is more ideal, more locally-oriented, and citizens that are more independent and entrepreneurial is overdue. In such a society, most families would own their own businesses rather than remaining dependent on government or corporations for their jobs and livelihoods

The big difference between free enterprise and distributive thought hinges on how we should move toward such a society. Dale Ahlquist, one of the authors, suggested the following:

“The dilemma of Distributism is the dilemma of freedom itself. Distributism cannot be done to the people, but only by the people. It is not a system that can be imposed from above; it can only spring up from below….If it happens, it seems most likely that it would be ushered in by a popular revolution. In any case, it must be popular. It would at some point require those with massive and inordinate wealth to give it up.”

The desire for popular support is normal for all political groups, but the idea that Distributism “would at some point require those with massive and inordinate wealth to give it up” is alarming at best.

Why would the wealthy have to “give it up?” Why is that necessary in free society? The word “required” is the problem.

Fortunately, Ahlquist clarifies that this would be voluntary, so it isn’t Marxist, but it still makes me wonder, why?

Nor is this the isolated view of just one author. Here is how another of the authors put it (and for this author voluntarism is replaced by government force):

“For instance, if I own one or several stores (say pizza restaurants) I would have a reasonable and normal rate of taxation, but as soon as I begin to assemble a chain of such businesses, then my rate of taxation would rise so sharply that no one of a normal disposition would seek to continue to own such a chain….A similar scheme of taxation would attack ‘multiple shops,’ that is, stores selling many lines of goods, such as a mega or ‘box’ stores, and stores with ‘large retail power.’”

Again, why? The answer is that no big institutions can be allowed, that everything must by force remain small.

This makes the same mistake as Marx, who taught that government would take from the rich and redistribute equally to all.

The mistake was to think that those running the government wouldn’t keep a little (or a lot) extra for themselves and their families.

In the Distributive ideal, where no institution can be allowed to be too big, the clear flaw is that any institution powerful enough to keep all the others small will have to be, well, big.

That means big government. The Distributists would presumably want the government to be local, but strong enough to keep all the other institutions small.

The American founders already dealt with this and wrote about it extensively in the Federalist Papers.

Madison, for example, said that nearly all of the colonies in the late 1780s suffered from local governments that were too dominant—they nearly all had corrupt and unfree practices.

This was one of the strongest arguments in support of the U.S. Constitution: a central entity would help reduce unfree and unfair governing fads which always arise in small (and therefore inbred) governments.

Clearly government has become much too big today, but a return to locales dominated by a few powerful families that ignore the needs of the rest of the people is not the answer—though it is precisely what would happen to most local governments if left to themselves. History is clear on this point.

We certainly need more local leadership, independence and a lot more entrepreneurialism and real ownership. We need good local government to make it work, and ideally a federation of local governments to maintain real freedom.

But back to the main point: why would we want to use government taxation to keep any business from growing?

If it offers a good product at a good price and people prefer its offering to those of other businesses, why should we drastically increase its taxes so that it remains small? Is smallness the central point?

If so, this is the reason I prefer free enterprise. One more quote will suffice to further my point:

“Of course, a suitable period of time would be necessary to complete an orderly sell-off of property from excessively large owners to small owners before the new tax system came into full effect. Moreover, if this is instituted at a very reasonable pace, with tax rates on concentrations of property increasing gradually each year, this would give owners more time to prepare and help prevent a ‘firesale’ of their property. Similarly some form of guaranteed loans would have to exist to allow those without property or money to purchase the excess property that was being sold.”

My first thought when I read this was, “Who gets to determine what ‘excess’ means in such a society? Whoever it is, they’ll eventually keep more of the money and power than everyone else.”

This one flaw in how the book describes Distributism is a serious problem. It proposes stopping one capitalist from getting too much wealth and power, but it doesn’t seem to realize that it also proposes taking the “excess” money from the capitalist and giving it to the socialist.

In contrast, free enterprise takes a different route. It establishes good laws that treat the rich, middle and poor the same. Period. That is freedom.

Some people may believe that this is the system we live under in the United States today. This is incorrect.

The U.S. commercial code has numerous laws which are written specifically to treat people differently based on their wealth.

For example, it is illegal for those with less than a certain amount of wealth to be offered many of the best investment opportunities. Only those with a high net worth (the amount is set by law) are able to invest in such offerings.

This naturally benefits the wealthy to the detriment of wage earners.

This system is called capitalism, and it is a bad system—better than socialism or communism, to be sure, but not nearly as good as free enterprise.

In a free enterprise system, the law would allow all people to take part in any investments. The law would be the same for all.

If this seems abstract, try starting a business in your local area. In fact, start two. Let the local zoning commissions, city council and other regulating agencies know that you are starting a business, that it will employ you and two employees, and then keep track of what fees you must pay and how many hoops you must jump through.

Have your agent announce to the same agencies that a separate company, a big corporation, is bringing in a large enterprise that will employ 4,000 people—all of whom will pay taxes to the local area and bring growth and prestige.

Then simply sit back and watch how the two businesses are treated. In most places in the United States, one will face an amazing amount of red tape, meetings, filings and obstacles—the other will likely be courted and given waivers, benefits and publicity.

Add up the cost to government of each, and two things will likely surprise you: 1) how much you will have to spend to set up a small business, and 2) how much the government will be willing to spend to court the large business.

This is the natural model in a capitalist system. Capital gets special benefits.

Apparently, in contrast, in Distributist society the small business would pay little and the big business would have to pay a lot more. Under socialism, neither business would be established at all—at least not by you. A government official would do it all, or not do it.

In free enterprise, the costs and obstacles would be identical for the two businesses. In free enterprise, the operative words are “free” and “enterprise.”

Some Distributists seem to share the socialist misconception that unless government forces smallness, every business owner will push to become too big.

Wendell Berry, a favorite writer of mine, often took the same tone. In reality, however, the evidence is clear that American business and ownership stayed mostly small—with most people owning family farms or small businesses—until the 1960s.

It was government debt which wiped out the farming culture that dominated the South and Midwest, and the rise of big corporations over family-owned businesses came after the U.S. commercial code was changed by law to a capitalist rather than a free enterprise model.

Instead of using government to force businesses to remain small, let’s consider giving freedom a try. It has worked for us in the past.

If we altered the laws at all levels so that government entities treated all businesses and citizens the same, regardless of their level of capital in the bank, the natural result would be the spread of more small businesses.

Freedom, not government control, is the answer.

With all that said, I’m convinced that at least some, maybe many or most, of Distributists in general and the contributing authors to Beyond Capitalism and Socialism specifically would agree with this point, that in fact their view of Distributism coincides with free enterprise. For example, Ahlquist’s chapter appears entirely supportive of free enterprise.

Still, I am concerned by this one thread of thought among some of the authors that seems to see government as the way to keep business from growing.

Free enterprise gives no special benefits to big business like capitalism does, but it also does not force businesses to remain small. If this is the view of most Distributists, I agree with them. Even if we disagree on this point, and I’m not sure we do, I find much to praise in this excellent book.

Beyond this one concern, I can’t say enough positive about Beyond Capitalism and Socialism. It is greatly needed by our citizens today.

Everyone should read it and ponder its application to our current world. Consider the following thoughts from this thought-provoking book:

“Home and family are the normal things. Trade and politics are necessary but minor things that have been emphasized out of all proportion.” –Dale Ahlquist

“What then is Distributism? It is that economic system or arrangement in which the ownership of productive private property, as much as possible, is widespread in a nation or society. In other words, in a Distributist society most…would own small farms or workshops…” –Thomas Storck

“As Political Economy is the child of Domestic Economy, all laws that weaken the home weaken the nation.” –Joseph McNabb

“The family, not the individual, is the unit of the nation.” –Joseph McNabb

“We don’t want to work hard. We don’t want to think hard. We want other people to do both our work and our thinking for us. We call in the specialists. And we call this state of utter dependency ‘freedom.’ We think we are free simply because we seem free to move about.” –Dale Ahlquist

“The conservatives and liberals have successfully reduced meaningful debate to name-calling. We use catchwords as a substitute for thinking. We know things only by their labels, and we have ‘not only no comprehension but no curiosity touching their substance or what they are made of.’” –Dale Ahlquist

“[T]oday here in the United States of America, and in all industrialized countries…there is a class of men and women, perhaps the majority, that…is unfree….I mean, all those who subsist on a wage, the price paid for the commodity they have and who have no other means of maintenance for themselves and their families. I mean…all those who subsist on a wage that is paid to them by those who are, in actuality, their masters; a wage that may be withdrawn at any time and for any reason, leaving them on the dole, or to starve, if they can find no new job…These are not free men in any rational and exact sense of the word.” –Ralph Adams Cram

“Every man should have his own piece of property, a place to build his own home, to raise his family, to do all the important things from birth to death: eating, singing, celebrating, reading, writing, arguing, story-telling, laughing, crying, praying. The home is above all a sanctuary of creativity. Creativity is our most Godlike quality. We not only make things, we make things in our own image. The family is one of those things. But so is the picture on the wall and the rug on the floor. The home is the place of complete freedom, where we may have a picnic on the roof and even drink directly from the milk carton.” –Dale Ahlquist

“The word ‘property’ has to do with what is proper. It also has to do with what is proportional. Balance has to do with harmony. Harmony has to do with beauty….The word ‘economy’ and the word ‘economics’ are based on the Greek word for house, which is oikos. The word ‘economy’ as we know it, however, has drifted completely away from that meaning. Instead of house, it has come to mean everything outside of the house. The home is the place where the important things happen. The economy is the place where the most unimportant things happen.” –Dale Ahlquist

“Caveat lector! For there is little resemblance indeed of the real ownership of real property…to the ‘rent-from-the-bank’ home ‘ownership’ (sic) of most American families.” –John Sharpe

“Our separation of economy from the house is part of a long fragmentation process….Capitalism has separated men from the home. Socialism has separated education from the home….The news and entertainment industry has separated originality and creativity from the home, rendering us into passive and malleable customers rather than active citizens.” –Dale Ahlquist

“In the age of specialization we tend to grasp only small and narrow ideas. We don’t even want to discuss a true Theory of Everything, unless it is invented by a specialist and addresses only that specialist’s ‘everything.’” –Dale Ahlquist

“In material things there can be no individual security without individual property. The independent farmer is secure. He cannot be sacked. He cannot be evicted. He cannot be bullied by landlord or employer. What he produces is his own: the means of production are his own. Similarly the independent craftsman is secure, and the independent shopkeeper. No agreements, no laws, no mechanism of commerce, trade, or State, can give the security which ownership affords. A nation of peasants and craftsmen whose wealth is in their tools and ski and materials can laugh at employers, money merchants, and politicians. It is a nation free and fearless. The wage-earner, however sound and skilful his work, is at the mercy of the usurers who own that by which he lives. Moreover, by his very subjection he is shut out from that training and experience which alone can fit him to be a responsible citizen. His servile condition calls for little discretion, caution, judgment, or knowledge of mankind. The so-called ‘failure of democracy’ is but the recognition of the fact that a nation of employees cannot govern itself.” –John Sharpe

Whether you agree or disagree with the details, this book is a treasure of great ideas to consider, discuss, ponder and think about.

Whether or not the ideas in Beyond Capitalism and Socialism become necessary to all of us through some major crisis ahead, a national consideration of these topics is long overdue. We do need to move beyond capitalism and socialism.

We need a rebirth of free enterprise, for our nation, economy, freedom, prosperity and above all, for our families and communities.

***********************************

Oliver DeMille is the founder and former president of George Wythe University, a co-founder of the Center for Social Leadership, and a co-creator of TJEd Online.

He is the author of A Thomas Jefferson Education: Teaching a Generation of Leaders for the 21st Century, and The Coming Aristocracy: Education & the Future of Freedom.

Oliver is dedicated to promoting freedom through leadership education. He and his wife Rachel are raising their eight children in Cedar City, Utah.

Connect With Oliver:

A friend gave me the book What Every American Needs to Know About the Qur’an: A History of Islam and the United States by William J. Federer.

I think my friend is concerned that I just don’t understand the fullness of the evil of Islam. So I am using this book as the starting point for this topic.

There are 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide and about 2.1 billion Christians.

In this country, although the public perception is rather high regarding what percentage of the 240,000,000 U.S. Christians are actively involved in their religion (regular church attendance and regular tithing), significant studies show the average guess to be off by more than half, with only 20 to 30 percent of U.S. Christians actively engaged in religious practices.

Unsurprisingly, the ratio is about the same for the estimated 3,000,000 Muslims citizens and immigrants who reside here.

Are we about to be overrun with Muslim zealots in a near future Jihad? Is Christianity about to be eclipsed by Islam? Are all Muslims taught to hate the infidel and seek to convert or kill Christians?

The first step in answering these questions is to learn more about Islam and the Qu’ran so that we are not shooting in the dark at phantoms.

In his book, Federer sites no specific Qu’ran translation, but claims that all Muslims want to rid the earth of all non-believers.

He cites many disconcerting verses within its chapters, called suras. I compared his quoted suras to the first online version of the Qu’ran (Sahih International) I could find.

This review only addresses the Qu’ran itself and does not comment on the rest of Federer’s book.

I discovered that many of the suras quoted by Federer were done so out of context, meaning that to understand what was really being said, you had to read a couple of suras before and even after the quoted one; you know, in context.

Federer’s suras are quoted first, followed by the quote in context.

Federer: Infidels are those who declare: ““God is the Christ, the son of Mary.”” (Sura 5:17)

Sura in Context: Sahih International, 5:17

“They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary. Say, ‘Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?’

“And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allah is over all things competent.”

Federer: Make war on the infidels who dwell around you. (Sura 9:123)

Sura in Context: Sahih International, 9:120

“It was not [proper] for the people of Madinah and those surrounding them of the bedouins that they remain behind after [the departure of] the Messenger of Allah or that they prefer themselves over his self.

“That is because they are not afflicted by thirst or fatigue or hunger in the cause of Allah, nor do they tread on any ground that enrages the disbelievers, nor do they inflict upon an enemy any infliction but that is registered for them as a righteous deed. Indeed, Allah does not allow to be lost the reward of the doers of good.”

9:121

“Nor do they spend an expenditure, small or large, or cross a valley but that it is registered for them that Allah may reward them for the best of what they were doing.”

9:122

“And it is not for the believers to go forth [to battle] all at once. For there should separate from every division of them a group [remaining] to obtain understanding in the religion and warn their people when they return to them that they might be cautious.”

9:123

“O you who have believed, fight those adjacent to you of the disbelievers and let them find in you harshness. And know that Allah is with the righteous.”

Another sura that suggests only self-defense:

4:90, Sahih International

“Except for those who take refuge with a people between yourselves and whom is a treaty or those who come to you, their hearts strained at [the prospect of] fighting you or fighting their own people.

“And if Allah had willed, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you. So if they remove themselves from you and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah has not made for you a cause [for fighting] against them.”

Federer: The infidels are your sworn enemies. (Sura 4:101)

Sura in Context: Sahih International, 4:101

“And when you travel throughout the land, there is no blame upon you for shortening the prayer, [especially] if you fear that those who disbelieve may disrupt [or attack] you. Indeed, the disbelievers are ever to you a clear enemy.”

4:102

“And when you are among them and lead them in prayer, let a group of them stand [in prayer] with you and let them carry their arms.

“And when they have prostrated, let them be [in position] behind you and have the other group come forward which has not [yet] prayed and let them pray with you, taking precaution and carrying their arms.

“Those who disbelieve wish that you would neglect your weapons and your baggage so they could come down upon you in one [single] attack.

“But there is no blame upon you, if you are troubled by rain or are ill, for putting down your arms, but take precaution. Indeed, Allah has prepared for the disbelievers a humiliating punishment.”

4:103

“And when you have completed the prayer, remember Allah standing, sitting, or [lying] on your sides. But when you become secure, re-establish [regular] prayer. Indeed, prayer has been decreed upon the believers a decree of specified times.”

4:104

“And do not weaken in pursuit of the enemy. If you should be suffering – so are they suffering as you are suffering, but you expect from Allah that which they expect not. And Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.”

Federer quotes this sura twice but with different translations:

When you meet the infidel in the battlefield, strike off their heads. (Sura 47:4)

“Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom. (Sura 47:4)”

Sahih International, 47:1

“Those who disbelieve and avert [people] from the way of Allah – He will waste their deeds.”

47:2

“And those who believe and do righteous deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon Muhammad – and it is the truth from their Lord – He will remove from them their misdeeds and amend their condition.”

47:3

“That is because those who disbelieve follow falsehood, and those who believe follow the truth from their Lord. Thus does Allah present to the people their comparisons.”

47:4

“So when you meet those who disbelieve [in battle], strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds, and either [confer] favor afterwards or ransom [them] until the war lays down its burdens. That [is the command].

“And if Allah had willed, He could have taken vengeance upon them [Himself], but [He ordered armed struggle] to test some of you by means of others. And those who are killed in the cause of Allah – never will He waste their deeds.

“Mohammed is Allah’s apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the infidels.” (Sura 48:29)

Federer: Kill the disbelievers wherever we find them. (Sura 2:191)

Sahih International, 2:190

“Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors.”

2:191

“And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah* is worse than killing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al-Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.”

2:192

“And if they cease, then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.”

2:193

“Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah. But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors.”

2:194

“[Fighting in] the sacred month is for [aggression committed in] the sacred month, and for [all] violations is legal retribution. So whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you. And fear Allah and know that Allah is with those who fear Him.”

Federer: The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger… will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. (Sura 5:33)

Sahih International, 5:27

“And recite to them the story of Adam’s two sons, in truth, when they both offered a sacrifice [to Allah], and it was accepted from one of them but was not accepted from the other. Said [the latter], “I will surely kill you.” Said [the former], “Indeed, Allah only accepts from the righteous [who fear Him].”

5:28

“If you should raise your hand against me to kill me – I shall not raise my hand against you to kill you. Indeed, I fear Allah, Lord of the worlds.”

5:29

“Indeed I want you to obtain [thereby] my sin and your sin so you will be among the companions of the Fire. And that is the recompense of wrongdoers.”

5:30

“And his soul permitted to him the murder of his brother, so he killed him and became among the losers.”

5:31

“Then Allah sent a crow searching in the ground to show him how to hide the disgrace of his brother. He said, “O woe to me! Have I failed to be like this crow and hide the body of my brother?” And he became of the regretful.”

5:32

“Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely.

“And whoever saves one – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.”

5:33

“Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land.

“That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,

5:34

“Except for those who return [repenting] before you apprehend them. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.”

To be continued…

**********************************

Shanon Brooks is the President of Monticello College, the Director of Education and Training for Humanitarian Visions International, S.A., and a founding partner of the Center for Social Leadership. He co-authored Thomas Jefferson Education for Teens.

Shanon and his wife Julia are raising their six children in Monticello, Utah.

Connect With Shanon:

Both groups can be found in Wall Street, Main Street, Las Vegas, Silicon Valley, Hollywood and in both of the major parties on Capitol Hill.

Both groups have great impact in the world, but the direction and focus of each group is significantly different. And unfortunately, members of one of these groups are far too rare.

The first group is what Brady calls:

“…the Council of They. They are the thought police, the guardians of political correctness, the masters of conformity, the keepers of the status quo. It is They who struggle to keep life always the way They say it should be, who fight change, who persecute creativity, and hurl criticism at anything that smacks of originality or authenticity.

“They try to say who is ‘in’ and who is ‘out.’ They seem to have so much power that good, creative people leave their lives on the shelf rather than face their wrath. They will try to influence how you live, what you do, whom you should marry, and how you should raise your children. They want control, obedience, and blind acquiescence…

“The only problem is, that herd of people following along in step aren’t going anywhere, and as long as anyone listens to them, he or she won’t go anywhere either.”

Like almost anything in our modern society, it is tempting for Republicans to point to this definition and say that the Council of They is Democrats, and for Democrats to say exactly the same about Republicans.

Many in the media, ironically, would think of the Tea Parties—who are clearly not following the path outlined by the experts.

Perhaps the reason this resonates on both sides of the political debate is that herd thinking has become too widespread across our society.

The second group doesn’t really act like a group, because it is made up of independent individuals who do their own thing.

Indeed, perhaps because of this choice to act according to their own views (not as followers of the herd mentality), Brady calls these people “Rascals.”

“What Rascals do is get out of line. In fact, many Rascals have heard most of their lives that they are out of line in one way or another! Rascals don’t fall for the lure of going along or becoming someone else just to please others. Rascals follow their convictions and confidently head in the direction of their destiny, mindful of their Creator and not of the crowd.

“Non-conformity is not what we are talking about, but rather, authenticity….The first rule of becoming a Rascal is to slay the dragon of They. Rascals, quite frankly, don’t care what They say. Rascals don’t take their cue from the peanut gallery. Rascals are driven by their own sense of purpose and direction.”

Brady rejects the definition of the term “Rascal” as unprincipled or dangerous to society, and instead focuses on people like John Wycliffe, the American founders, Mark Twain, Harriet Tubman and Mother Teresa who see what is needed in the world and go against the norm in order to make the world better.

One of his heroic “rascals” is the freedom-loving Chinese man who stood in front of the tank in the famous video clip from the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989.

Some of the very most important Rascals in history are regular people who ignore the path of the masses and take action to make a positive difference in society.

For those who want to be such leaders, Brady includes an excellent test to help you find out how much of an independent-minded leader you are.

I highly recommend this book to everyone.

What America Needs

Modern America needs a generation of great leader-citizens. Many great leaders like Gandhi, Andrew Carnegie, Margaret Thatcher, Mother Teresa, Nelson Mandela and others have done things in ways outside the mainstream—ways that are creative and genuine.

Such people have been called by many names, including Outliers, Pioneers, Explorers, Beagles, Founders, Mavericks, Trailblazers, Disruptive Innovators, and Leaders.

I have referred to them as Statesmen and also Social Leaders. I have written about them, and how to join them in making a real difference, extensively in my books and articles.

Most recently I described the coming impact of their independent thinking on the political future of America in my book FreedomShift.

Centuries ago the great classical economist J.B. Say invented a name for people who go against the norm, change things for good even in the face of societal opposition, and turn unproductive commodities into productive resources for society. He called them Entrepreneurs.

More recently, Jonathan Fields called them “Career Renegades,” people who overcome the widely-promoted fears that unless we follow the “normal” paths outlined by society we’ll end up failing.

In the new post-meltdown economy, success at all levels and walks of society is more and more dependent on being this innovative type of person. In our time, perhaps the best name for such people is “supermen” and “superwomen.”

Whatever we call them, today they lead most small businesses and more of them are found in small business than anywhere else. America needs more of them.

We live in a society in desperate want of leadership from such people. The future of our national prosperity depends on how well they overcome the current challenges to the economy—including government overreach—and apply innovation, initiative, ingenuity, creativity, tenacity, and social leadership in our nation and world.

Such leadership is needed in business, family, neighborhoods, the arts and sciences, society and government. Each of us should consider in what ways we can improve ourselves and provide such leadership.

Our national future may well depend on how effectively we make and implement this choice. And it is time for Washington to decrease regulation, taxes, and get out of the way of the small businesspeople who can rebuild our economy.

***********************************

Oliver DeMille is the founder and former president of George Wythe University, a co-founder of the Center for Social Leadership, and a co-creator of TJEd Online.

He is the author of A Thomas Jefferson Education: Teaching a Generation of Leaders for the 21st Century, and The Coming Aristocracy: Education & the Future of Freedom.

Oliver is dedicated to promoting freedom through leadership education. He and his wife Rachel are raising their eight children in Cedar City, Utah.

Connect With Oliver:

I say that so my next statements will carry weight: I know of no single book that describes social leadership better than Chris Brady’s most recent, Rascal: Making a Difference by Becoming an Original Character.

And there’s no other book I would recommend more to aspiring social leaders — even more so than all the other books we’ve listed here.

I devoured it in one sitting last night. It resonated deeply with me and I implore every one of our community members to buy it and read it immediately.

It’s relevant, inspiring, and packed with excellent examples of real-life social leaders who made a significant difference.

Consider this story about the Indian warrior, Crazy Horse:

In the summer of 1876, the United States government issued an ultimatum declaring that all Indian tribes not reporting in to a reservation would be considered hostile.

The Lakota and other tribes formed a coalition at Ash Creek at the request of the legendary leader, Sitting Bull. This was the largest gathering any of them had seen in their lifetimes.

Scouts reported that soldiers were approaching from the south, about 50 miles away.

Crazy Horse, a young but respected warrior, gathered his weapons, donned his war paint, rode out of camp on his war horse, and circled the perimeter of the camp.

Author John M. Marshall III describes the scene:

“As he finished the second turn around the encampment and began the third, the old ones watching realized what Crazy Horse was doing. He was invoking an old ritual known as ‘Gathering the Warriors.’

“Word spread quickly as more and more men joined the growing procession. It seemed as though everyone in camp stopped whatever they were doing to watch. Women began to sing the Strong Heart songs to encourage their fighting men.

“As the fourth and final turn around the encampment began, it was difficult to see where the procession of fighting men started and where it ended. It encircled the entire camp.”

The united warriors rode through the night and fought for more than 10 hours the next day, defeating their enemies at the Battle of the Rosebud. Eight days later, these same warriors defeated Custer at the Battle of the Little Big Horn.

With this book, Chris Brady is “gathering the warriors,” and I’d be honored to be counted among them.

I’ll let you read the book to learn Chris’s full definition of “Rascal,” but his “Rascal Manifesto” gives you a good idea:

I was born free and I intend to live like it.
This means that I will live my life while I’m alive.

No one owns me except my Creator.
No one can put me in a box, a category, a social group, a voting block, or a classification.
I am fiercely independent,
and with those aligned with me in common purpose, interdependent.

I know that with my freedom comes responsibility.
I take responsibility for my own actions, and I hold the bar high on myself.
I am not afraid to struggle, because it’s the struggle that makes me great.
I know that excellence always lies on the other side of inconvenience.

I am a learning machine.
I read, I confront brutal reality, I grow.
Long term, no one and nothing can defeat me, because I will keep coming back, stronger and better than before.

I will educate myself about the true principles of freedom,
and I will strive mightily to preserve freedom for the next generation.
I rely on no man and no government to provide for me.
I will not follow the herd of mediocrity and victim-thinking.
I don’t follow herds, instead I run with a pack – a pack of Rascals.

Let others bask in their privileges, as for me, I will invest them in my purpose.
I will defy tyranny.
I will charge the hill.
I will make a difference.
I’m a Rascal!

Buy and read the book. Be an original character. Make a difference.

*****************************

Stephen Palmer is a book writer for mission-driven leaders, a small business lead generation website design architect and persuasive website copywriter, a co-founder of The Center for Social Leadership, and the author of Uncommon Sense: A Common Citizen’s Guide to Rebuilding America.

He co-authored the New York Times bestseller Killing Sacred Cows: Overcoming the Financial Myths that are Destroying Your Prosperity, as well as Hub Mentality: Shifting from Business Transactions to Community Interaction.

He is a liberal-arts graduate of George Wythe University and a graduate and faculty member of the “non-traditional business school” Wizard Academy.

Stephen resides in Round Rock, Texas with his gorgeous wife Karina, awesome son Alex, and princess daughters Libby, Avery, and Laela.

Subscribe to Stephen’s blog and contact him at stephen [at] leadershipwriter [dot] com.

It’s at once humorous and infuriating. Humorous because of Joel’s genuine, down-to-earth writing style that just makes you chuckle throughout. Infuriating because of the jumble of insane bureaucracy he reveals.

Joel can be pretty far out with some of his political views, but that adds to the appeal of the book. Joel defines authentic — he lets it all hang out, doesn’t mince words, and states things plainly.

Whether you agree with him or not, he’s a likable guy whose thoughts should be considered seriously.

Proponents of locavorism, sustainable agriculture, and gardening, such as myself, will devour this book with glee.

But even if you’re not a “foodie,” this is a must-read for anyone dedicated to building a mini-factory.

In The Coming Aristocracy, Oliver DeMille points out that one reason we’ve lost freedom in America is because we have so many employees relative to owners, and employees don’t directly struggle with the loss of freedom on a daily basis.

He writes:

“In our current model of government and corporate dependence, aristocratic institutions, laws and policies encounter only nominal resistance. More to the point, relatively few people are even aware of how burdensome our current regulatory environment is. Employees are largely shielded from red tape. Ironically, they feel its effects indirectly in almost every aspect of their lives, but few make the connection.

“Create a multitude of mini-factory owners and it’s a different story. Suddenly, freedom issues are brought to the forefront as more and more people clash with bureaucracy, and mass consciousness is awakened.”

Everything I Want To Do Is Illegal is the perfect example of this. Unless you’re on the front lines, as is Joel, you don’t know how burdensome our bureaucracies have become.

But a good starting point is to learn from an in-the-trenches farmer like Joel Salatin. Joel caught the attention of Michael Pollan in his New York Times bestseller The Omnivore’s Dilemma when he refused to ship T-Bone steaks to New York. Since then, he’s been featured in a lot of media, including the documentaries “The Future of Food” and “Food, Inc.”

As Joel writes:

“Our farm, Polyface, has been featured in countless publications and media…All this notoriety has vaulted our family farm into the spotlight, the darling of local food advocates around the world…

“What many people do not understand, however, is that at every step on this journey toward success, government officials have unceasingly tried to criminalize us, demonize us, dismiss us, and laugh at us. We have fought, clawed, cried, prayed, argued, and threatened.

“The point is that if it had been up to public servants, Polyface would not exist. And the struggle is not over. Some battles, as you will see, we did not win. Some we refuse to fight. The war goes on…

“Supporters of local, heritage, artisanal, organic, ecological, sustainable, humane, biodynamic food need to know that every day, their food farmer friends receive visits, phone calls, threats, summonses, confiscation, and criminal charges.

“The harassment from government officials would make your hair stand on end. This book is about one such farmer’s lifetime of dealing with these issues.”

If you care about freedom, I urge you to read Everything I Want To Do Is Illegal. It makes theory concrete and will motivate you to stick with the fight.

*****************************

Stephen Palmer is a book writer for mission-driven leaders, a small business lead generation website design architect and persuasive website copywriter, a co-founder of The Center for Social Leadership, and the author of Uncommon Sense: A Common Citizen’s Guide to Rebuilding America.

He co-authored the New York Times bestseller Killing Sacred Cows: Overcoming the Financial Myths that are Destroying Your Prosperity, as well as Hub Mentality: Shifting from Business Transactions to Community Interaction.

He is a liberal-arts graduate of George Wythe University and a graduate and faculty member of the “non-traditional business school” Wizard Academy.

Stephen resides in Round Rock, Texas with his gorgeous wife Karina, awesome son Alex, and princess daughters Libby, Avery, and Laela.

Subscribe to Stephen’s blog and contact him at stephen [at] leadershipwriter [dot] com.

Unfortunately, reading hundreds of books on the same topic means there is seldom something really new—fresh, exciting, revolutionary that uplifts the entire genre.

The last such surprise for me came several years ago in the writings of Steve Farber. But now, finally, comes another great addition to the leadership genre: Launching a Leadership Revolution by Chris Brady and Orrin Woodward.

Their subtitle, “Mastering the Five Levels of Influence,” sounds like typical management book fare, but it isn’t.

Each level is vital, well-taught and interesting, and together they form a truly revolutionary model for leadership.

This is not exaggeration—this book is excellent! I rank it right along with the best of Drucker, Bennis, Blanchard, Gerber, Collins, Deming, and Farber. It is destined to be a classic.

Brady and Woodward teach that everyone will be called upon for leadership at some point in their life.

They then turn leadership upon its head, noting that while many people seek leadership for the perceived benefits of power, control, or perks, the true life of a leader is actually built upon

“…giving power (empowering)…helping others fix problems…and serving others. Leaders lead for the joy of creating something bigger than themselves.”

This follows Greenleaf’s tradition of servant leadership, but with a twist.

Launching a Leadership Revolution shines because it gets into the specific work of leadership. It outlines many pages of work leaders must do, and explains which work to focus on most.

But the book seldom uses the word “work”, instead preferring the active “working.” Just the list of “working” items for leaders is worth more than the price of the book.

Maybe the best thing about this book is the authors’ ability to take traditional, classic leadership basics and give them new, profound definitions.

For example, the definition of learn goes from the old “a leader is always learning” to “a leader must be able to learn from anyone.”

Imagine the leadership revolution that would occur if top executives and government officials really did seek to learn from everyone!

Another example: The meaning of perform is transformed from “please your boss” or “improve the bottom line” to “persevere through failure to find success.”

This is the best definition of leadership performance I’ve ever read in print. And the book teaches the reader how to do it.

Likewise, the advice to develop others as leaders moves beyond all the clichés to become “learn to trust your people.” It includes fitting them to be truly trustworthy.

That’s what leadership should be– but seldom is even considered.

There are many other examples. This book is a revolution that builds on the best ideas and thinkers of the past by applying them in fresh new ways applicable to the information age.

We learn from case studies such as George Washington, Winston Churchill, Benjamin Franklin and many others right along with contemporary needs and challenges.

Above all, the book places leadership success squarely on the success of mentoring and gives excellent advice to mentors on how to help people bring out the leadership inside them.

Everyone serious about Leadership Education will want to read this book, and apply the principles to our learning and mentoring.

In truth, great leadership is simply using great influence for great things, and this book can help each of us do this.

In these times of government bailouts and “fixes,” it is important to remember that the American Dream never was a government program. The American Dream was a leadership revolution, where regular people chose leadership and became leaders.

This revolution is still needed today, perhaps more than ever before in history.

“If you don’t like the way the world is, you change it. You have an obligation to change it. You just do it one step at a time.” -Marian Wright Edelman

I just finished reading The Blue Sweater: Bridging the Gap Between Rich and Poor in an Interconnected World by Jacqueline Novogratz. It was an inspiring and overwhelming experience.

Jacqueline is the “founder and CEO of Acumen Fund, a nonprofit venture capital firm for the poor that invests in sustainable enterprises bringing healthcare, safe water, alternative energy, and housing to low-income people in the developing world.”

More than anything, I was stunned at how precisely we described Jacqueline’s life and impact in Social Leadership: A Fresh Vision for Old Problems. Page after page, I discovered vivid elements of our S.O.C.I.A.L. acronym in Jacqueline’s experiences, mindset, and accomplishments.

Consider the following excerpts:

Submission

“When I told Sister Theophane I wanted to be a nun,” [she said], ‘Regardless of what you become, remember always that to whom much is given much is expected. God gave you many gifts and it is important that you use them for others as best you can.’”

Oneness

“Though the average citizen cannot, of course, match the enormous gifts made by successful entrepreneurs such as Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, each of us in his or her own way can contribute something by thinking — and acting — like a true global citizen. We have only one world for all of us on earth, and the future really is ours to create, in a world we dare to imagine together.”

“People need to feel responsible to one another. Otherwise, we will breed successful individuals who don’t feel connected enough to the greater society.”

“People need to believe that they can participate fully in the decisions that affect their lives and have a stake in societies in which they live.”

The title of the book speaks of an astounding experience that taught Jacqueline the principle of oneness, but I’ll let you discover that for yourself…

Calling

“I…knew instinctively that a combination of service and adventure could lead to a life of passion and constant renewal.”

“…I believed an important way to solve povety was to link grassroots organizations to the resources and skills of mainstream corporations. I wanted to be a bridge…an instrument of peace wrapped in a love of financial statements, of telling stories through numbers, of trying to build companies through strategic financing and management support.”

Integral Education

“As I was about to graduate [from the University of Virginia], I remember feeling a deep sense of pride in knowing that I would forever have the tools to support myself, no matter what happened in life.”

“At the Philanthropy Workshop…we read and discussed Aristotle and Socrates, Martin Luther King, Jr. and Gandhi.”

“Each year, we select approximately 10 extraordinary young people…they spend days reading and discussing literature and poetry — Aristotle and Martin Luther King, Jr., Gandhi, Aung San Suu Kyi, and Nelson Mandela, among others — to help them begin to hone and then ground their own philosophies for change in the pragmatic realities of the work we do.”

Action

“But where to start? Like so many young people with skills today, my desire to contribute to changing the world…wasn’t matched by a proper game plan: I had no idea how to do it…So I did what I now tell young people to do: I started where I could and where I was given a chance.”

“…I realized I had no choice but to do the only thing I knew how to do well — I would just work. And then work some more. And try to pay attention to whatever the work was teaching me.”

“But empathy is only our starting point. It must be combined with focus and conviction, the toughness to know what needs to get done and the courage to follow through.”

Liberty

“…freedom is not just about political liberty, but also about economic independence and the power of choice. The women in the slums were operating under dependency, not freedom. If the donor community couldn’t help these women liberate themselves, they needed to get out of the way.”

“If the women had been given a chance to borrow for a project they believed would generate income, they would have focused more seriously on the work. A market mechanism would have provided a better feedback loop for both women and donors. Instead, the system festered under low expectations and mediocre results.”

“I’ve learned that solutions to poverty must be driven by discipline, accountability, and market strength, not easy sentimentality. I’ve learned that many of the answers to poverty lie in the space between the market and charity and that what is needed most of all is moral leadership willing to build solutions from the perspectives of the poor people rather than imposing grand theories and plans upon them.”

The Blue Sweater is a must-read for any aspiring social leader. Buy it, read it, and learn from a textbook case of social leadership how to change the world.

*****************************

Stephen Palmer is a book writer for mission-driven leaders, a small business lead generation website design architect and persuasive website copywriter, a co-founder of The Center for Social Leadership, and the author of Uncommon Sense: A Common Citizen’s Guide to Rebuilding America.

He co-authored the New York Times bestseller Killing Sacred Cows: Overcoming the Financial Myths that are Destroying Your Prosperity, as well as Hub Mentality: Shifting from Business Transactions to Community Interaction.

He is a liberal-arts graduate of George Wythe University and a graduate and faculty member of the “non-traditional business school” Wizard Academy.

Stephen resides in Round Rock, Texas with his gorgeous wife Karina, awesome son Alex, and princess daughters Libby, Avery, and Laela.

Subscribe to Stephen’s blog and contact him at stephen [at] leadershipwriter [dot] com.