Selling the Sacrifice

Marketing of the system could be done through traditional methods like church meetings, social media, web marketing, etc. However, because the system has a very important political aspect, people who want to promote the idea could do so very effectively by running for political offices and using the platforms that come as a part of a campaign to share the idea. It would not be all that important to win the elections, what would be more important is to use the opportunity of running to capitalize on the opportunity in front of audiences. Local and state political offices could be great target campaigns, especially if the development side of the application could focus on localizing the ability to meet needs. The idea itself could be packaged almost into the platforms of a political party, and then the party could be used as a vehicle to spread the idea.

Spreading the idea is important, and fine tuning how it is communicated will also be essential. People need to be able to easily understand the principles guiding the system, why they are important, and they need to see the value that will be created. Giving to the poor, especially the poor from whom the kind of political dependency we are looking to redirect, is not really a satisfying endeavor. This is evidence by the fact that the government has to force us to do it through taxation, and many charities rely upon the additional incentive of the tax deduction in order to compel people to give donations. The level of giving that this system will require in order to be successful is sacrificial. I think there are at least two groups of people who would be able to see the real incentive in sacrificially giving to provide resources for this project, activist patriots and Christians.

I do believe that people who are patriotic and who desire to actually see the government shrink back to its constitutional role would be interested in providing resources for this system. I believe they would be able to understand why it is important to redirect the political dependency of the poor, and this would serve as a powerful incentive for them to give. These groups of people are generally activists, they have been trying hard to use the political system to fight the encroachments of big government, and they are also very adept at using all forms of media to get their ideas out into the public. Unfortunately, because they have not be able to provide a solution the problem of feeding the poor up front, they have been unable to successfully garner the political authority needed to change the direction of our country. I am one of these patriots, and I am frustrated with the time, work and money that have been put in to losing campaigns, and other efforts that have made some progress, but have by no means slowed the advance of the state. The prospect of a system that could actually diffuse the power structure of the federal system is truly exciting to me, and if it were developed in a way that I could understand and trust what it was doing, I would gladly and sacrificially give to see if it could make some headway for liberty.

The other group that may be able to hear this message is Christians. Many Christians are discontented with the state of the church as a whole. They are tired of building buildings and buying sound systems and putting on flashy concerts, all of which seem to be almost totally irrelevant to making real change to our culture. Many Christians are hungry to get back to the core of Christianity and see the kind of community that is described by the book of Acts regarding the early Church. Many believers want to give to care for the poor as is commanded by scripture, but unfortunately, ministers without integrity is almost as euphemistic as politicians without integrity. We are at a place in our society where people have a very difficult time trusting other people with the management of resources to be used to enact systems of principle.

The bible says that the early Christian church sold their possessions and laid the proceeds at the feet of the apostles who distributed it to each as they had need.

"For there was not a needy person among them, for all who were owners of land or houses would sell them and bring the proceeds of the sales and lay them at the apostles’ feet, and they would be distributed to each as any had need." Acts 4:34-35


This single verse contains within in it a complex system of trust, integrity, organization, and logistics. In other words, they, like the founding fathers, used what they had available to them in order to achieve the principled ends they were seeking.

The early church was fortunate to have Apostles that were more or less universally trusted to carry out the responsibility over these resources with integrity. I know of no such Apostles, and even if I did, convincing you that they could be trusted would be a whole different chore. However communicating ideas and principles to you is much easier, and many people are very comfortable with automated systems, especially if they can see this system actually execute the principals they were designed for reliably.

Consider the admonition of Christ in Luke 16 regarding the shrewd manager, where he rebukes his followers for not having the common sense to deal with money and business systems that even a dishonest business man could figure out. He then commands them to use unrighteous money to make friends. It is clear to me that Jesus taught us to care for the poor, he also taught that the most powerful among us would be those who served. With an understanding that political power is derived from the dependency of the poor, we can see that Jesus was pleading with us to be shrewd about how we go about caring for the poor.   The parable of the sheep and the goats, the admonitions of scripture to care for the widows and orphans are clear commands of scripture.  In ou

r failure as a church to meet the demands of these requirements, and our relegating the responsibility onto the state, we justify our "stewardship" (hoarding of resources upon our own infrastructure) by placing barriers and moral standards between the poor and our charity.  I am certainly glad that God did not place such standards on us when he gave us the gift of Christ.  Maybe we should follow his lead in caring for the poor.

Many Christians see the danger in using systems of benevolence to lord power over others.  In fact many organizations end up using their benevolence as a method to accumulate "trophy" people that have reformed their lives while receiving their charity.  The programs are then perverted away from the original mission of loving and helping people and instead used to attempt to capitalize on their personal transformations, and inevitably end up putting an unrealistic expectation upon the people they are attempting to serve.  Rebellion and relapse are common under these circumstances because the broken people find themselves being viewed as a renovation project instead of as a human being.  

A system such as the one I have been describing would enable Christians to meet the commands of the gospel and give to the poor, while programmatically ensuring that their left hand didn’t know what their right hand was doing, thus defeating the temptation to amass power and enabling them to focus on developing relationships and loving the poor as people. By taking the wisdom that the agents of our government have clearly figured out to control us, and then using that same wisdom to diffuse political power instead of to concentrate it, I can clearly see the path to fulfilling our obligations to the Gospel, and creating liberty for all the people in the process.

If you’ve gotten to this part of this document, I’m assuming I've held your interest. Do you want to make it happen? I am not looking for money, and I plan on keeping my day job as an IT person to pay my bills. I will give sacrificially to the project if it comes to life. I will give of my money and time, and of my ideas, because I can truly see the vision of liberty t
hat it could create. Will you join me?

Comments