As Emily and I were pulling up to City Hall in Philly, we noticed the Occupy tent village. The first big tent that I saw was bedecked with a very large Ron Paul sign. From what we witnessed concerning the Occupy a few minutes later—chants of curse words and cries for revolution—I was knocked a little sideways concerning how a Ron Paul sign—most Pauline supporters seem quite committed to things like personal responsibility (unlike the Occupiers) even if their libertarianism goes off the rail at times (for more on this see Wilson’s article). What pray tell do these too groups have in common?
I think I found the common thread. See how this strikes you. Both the Tea Party (and Ron Paul’s supporters) and the Occupy movement are reactions to the bailout. The Tea Party knows that the bailout was wrong. They believe it was morally wrong. They tell this truth to everyone that will listen. The yell, “No!!!” When the government contemplates more relief because they rightly see it as theft (either from us in the present or from future generations).
Occupy is also a reaction to the bailout. It also says that the bailout was wrong. It believes that it was wrong, however, not because it was morally wrong or because it was theft, but because it was unfair. They are steamed that Wall Street Bankers who made idiotic decisions were protected by the full faith and credit of the government (i.e., by the wealth or selling of present and unborn taxpayers [if you read slavery when you see this you are probably closest to the truth]). We all should be steamed about this! They are most steamed, however, because the government helped those folks, but is not helping them. They want their own bailout so that they can avoid foreclosure, or so that they can be given a job, or so that they can have whatever they want. They reason that if the government gave someone a cupcake, then it has to give everyone a cupcake. Of course, this is insanity because we can’t afford any more cupcakes—nor could we afford the cupcakes that we have recently bought (i.e., recently in the last thirty years).
These movements are not consistent. How does this relate to a classical Christian education. It is an application of what Sayers says about the Logic Stage—in which we teach students to think critically and clearly—when says that its aim is that we Distinguish! We see the differences between one thing and something that sounds (at points) very similar, but is, at its roots, quite different.
