Mine. Not Yours.

Dean Gotcher

Private property, business, convictions, etc., all began in a garden called Eden, with God chasing two rebellious children off his land, cutting them out of the will, placing security at his gate, making sure they couldn't come back (except under his conditions—the gospel message). "So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life." Genesis 3:24

While 'liberal's,' thinking like Jean-Jacques Rousseau, declare "the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody." (Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality) they make sure no one has control over the earth and its fruits except themselves—living off "the people" in the name of "the people." God declares "the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof." (1 Corinthians 10:26)—with God giving man "dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." (excluding man in the list) (Genesis 1:26).

We derive private property from God, an inalienable right. We loose (abdicate) it when we let the "wisdom" of 'liberal "experts" take control over the language of law, where "lawfulness without law," as Immanuel Kant put it, makes sure any rights you have (give to you from above) are left out of the equation. In the praxis of dialoguing opinions to a consensus (the soviet system) "Mine. Not yours." becomes "Ours. Not just yours." making all laws subject to the ideology of 'liberals,' making you, your spouse, children, land, property, business, etc., "resource" to be used by them for their own pleasure and gain, all being done for the "good" of "the people." The liberal, when he declares "It is not about you" is in fact stating "It is all about me." If you listen to him, i.e., i.e., you give him power over you, i.e., if you abdicate your authority over to him you become "human resource," abdicating all that God has given you over to him, rejecting the Lord in the praxis.

Georg Hegel wrote: "On account of the absolute and natural oneness of the husband, the wife, and the child [their common (natural) "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, including (and especially) their desire for approval from one another (affirmation) being the 'drive' and 'purpose' of life], where there is no antithesis [no "top-down," "right-wrong, "Mine, not yours" way of thinking and acting] of person to person or of subject to object, the surplus is not the property of one of them, since their indifference is not a formal or a legal one." (Hegel, System of Ethical Life)

Karl Marx wrote: "The justice of state constitutions is to be decided not on the basis of Christianity, not from the nature of Christian society but from the nature of human society." "The state arises out of the exigencies of man's nature." "Laws must not fetter human life; but yield to it; they must change as the needs and capacities of the people change [determined by whom?]." "To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right')

When you hold your child for the very first time life changes, "Mine. Not yours" takes on real meaning. It is this "Mine. Not yours" that 'liberal's' seek to negate.

Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Vladimir Lenin) stated: "...a more powerful enemy, the bourgeoisie [the citizens honoring (submitting to) the Kings authority over them, the property and business owners expecting the workers to do the same to them, i.e., to honour (submit themselves to) their authority over them, as children, honoring (submitting themselves to) their father's authority over them, as man honors (submits himself to) God's authority over him; all being the same in structure, system, or paradigm (patriarchal)—"top-down," "do it right, i.e., My way, or else," "Mine. Not yours"], whose resistance ... and whose power lies in ... the force of habit, in the strength of small-scale production [in private business, where workers must submit to their bosses authority as children must submit to their father's authority]. Unfortunately, small-scale production [local control, under the father's authority] is still widespread in the world, and small-scale production engenders capitalism [capitulating to the father's authority] and the bourgeoisie [the middle class which initiates and sustains, i.e., engenders and supports the father's authority] continuously, daily, hourly, spontaneously, and on a mass scale. Capitalism and the bourgeois environment … disappears very slowly even after the overthrow of the bourgeoisie, (since the peasantry constantly regenerates the bourgeoisie) give rise to what is essentially the same bourgeois careerism, national chauvinism, petty-bourgeois vulgarity [belief or faith in a higher authority than themselves], etc. —merely varying insignificantly in form—in positively every sphere of activity and life. … until small-scale economy and small commodity production [private property and business under the father's authority] have entirely disappeared, the bourgeois atmosphere, proprietary habits and petty-bourgeois traditions will hamper proletarian work both outside and within the working-class movement, … in every field of social activity, in all cultural and political spheres without exception. We must learn how to master every sphere of work and activity without exception, to overcome all difficulties and eradicate all bourgeois habits, customs and traditions everywhere." (Vladimir Lenin, Left-Wing Communism: an Infantile Disorder; An Essential Condition of the Bolsheviks' Success, May 12, 1920)

Three months prior to Lenin's speech, György Lukács wrote: "'Capital' … is, according to Marx, 'not a thing but a social relation between persons mediated through things.' 'These relations,' Marx states, 'are not those between one individual and another, but between worker and capitalist, tenant and landlord, [between the children and their parents, i.e., between the child's "feelings" of the 'moment' and the parents established commands, rules, facts, and truth which inhabit or block the child from expressing and satisfying himself, according to his desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment'], etc. Eliminate these relations [the father's/Father's authority over the children, i.e., the children uniting themselves as "one" in the praxis or social action of negating the father's/Father's authority over them] and you abolish the whole of society; …… a scientifically acceptable solution does exist [dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., dialogue and the consensus , i.e., the soviet process] … For to accept that solution, even in theory [as an opinion, i.e., aufheben], would be tantamount to observing society from a class [from the children's] standpoint other than that of the bourgeoisie [from the parents]. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power freely [the 'moment' parent's evaluate their authority over the child from the child's perception, from the child's desires and dissatisfactions, they negate their authority over the child—becoming at-one-with the child in "feelings," "thought," and "action," i.e., in theory and practice]. ' '... the ideological history of the bourgeoisie was nothing but a desperate resistance to every insight into the true nature of the society it had created and thus to a real understanding of its class situation.… the Communist Manifesto makes the point that the bourgeoisie produces its own grave-diggers [the parent's, insisting upon their authority over the children, prepare the children to turn against them and destroy or annihilate them and their authority].'" "... which the consciousness of the proletariat has striven to create ever since its inception. The workers' council [the consensus (soviet) meetings] spells the political and economic defeat of reification [the end of right and wrong, "Mine. Not yours."  i.e., the father's/Father's way of thinking and acting]. In the period following the dictatorship it will eliminate the bourgeois separation of the legislature, administration and judiciary." (György Lukács History & Class Consciousness, March, 1920)

This is the direction our country is heading, with the 'liberal's' leading the way, thinking that all you have is theirs.

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2018