What is wrong with the quote, “Money is the root of all evil”? Whether you know the answer or not, I hope this article points out the subtlety and deception in that common phrase.
It is said that Satan is the Great Deceiver, the Great Counterfeiter. William Shakespeare described him as a gentleman. C.S. Lewis wrote: “the safest road to Hell is the gradual one-the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts.” Satan is so effective because he usually mixes some truth with falsehood.
The deception in this saying on money comes from the common link between money and a capitalist society-and therefore not just saying money is the root of all evil, but then deducing that capitalism must also be evil, since it uses money. From this saying come other (erroneous) anti-capitalism sayings, such as “businesses only care about money and profits,” or “it’s all about the bottom line,” or, simply, “capitalism is evil.”
This lack of understanding comes from a misquotation of scripture that has done much harm to capitalism. The actual quotation comes from the New Testament, 1 Timothy 6:10 (KJV):
For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
Of course, money is a good thing, although it-like most things-can be used for evil purposes. It is simply a medium of exchange, used to serve as a common denominator, which then makes more exchange possible. Money is actually useful and necessary in a complex society, allowing a society to move from barter to more advanced civilization. It helps the entrepreneur allocate resources according to their relative prices, and provides the ability to calculate revenues and expenses, profits and losses. It facilitates specialization and the division of labor. In short, it makes economic calculation possible.
But the love of money is something very different; for the love of anything over God would be breaking the first commandment, of loving God with all your heart, soul, and mind, of having “No other gods before [God].” A love of money relates to greed (not self-interest) and pride, both of which are the opposites of Christian benevolence and meekness (not weakness). It is greed and pride and the worship of false gods that is evil. This is why we read in the Old Testament that if we walk after other gods, we will perish.
With a proper understanding of scripture we can more accurately view the danger of allowing anyone to have a monopoly on the money supply-and not that capitalism is evil because money is involved. We can also see how competing currencies would help to minimize the risk of someone having a monopoly of money, of someone with the absurd power to create money out of thin air as a counterfeiter, an illusionist, a deceiver.
A monopolization on the power to print (virtually unlimited amounts of) money is playing with fire, and it can be used to burn others. As Franz Oppenheimer pointed out, there are two ways individuals can meet their needs: the political means and the economic means. The economic means are work and an individual’s own labor, whereas the political means are robbery (taxes) and the appropriation of others’ labor. The political means tend to attract the most corrupt and adept men, who excel at manipulating and deceiving others. And yet these very same corrupt men are the ones in charge of printing money!
The State is a counterfeiter writ large. It is illegal for citizens to counterfeit, and yet the State gets away with it-it is still evil, yet defined as “legal.” It has rights that men do not have. It attempts to create the law, and then exempts itself from the law.
Since the love of money is the root of all evil, it shows the power the State has with its printing press, and the evil it can accomplish. Think about it: the power to print money at its whim, to wage wars, to destroy a currency and debase your money, to bail out any industry with little justification. Public opinion and votes no longer matter-it is who is in charge of the money supply that makes the difference. Income taxes become mostly irrelevant.
It is very unlikely that the US would have gone to war with Iraq if the war had to be paid out of tax dollars. Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes pointed out the following economic truth:
Deficit spending gives the illusion that the laws of economics can be repealed, that we can have both guns and butter. But of course the laws are not repealed. The costs of the war are real even if they have been deferred, possibly to another generation.
And what are the monetary costs of the Iraq war? Mr. Stiglitz and Ms. Bilmes later write:
The figure we arrive at is more than $3 trillion. Our calculations are based on conservative assumptions. . . . A $3 trillion figure for the total cost strikes us as judicious, and probably errs on the low side. Needless to say, this number represents the cost only to the United States. It does not reflect the enormous cost to the rest of the world, or to Iraq.
A war of $3 trillion dollars would cost the average US household around $26,000 in taxes; it costs $400,000 per troop. (The Wall Street bailout would cost at least around $6,000 per household.) The power to print money is the power to wage war and allow fascist regimes to come into power. Actually, it is worse. Thomas Jefferson no doubt understood the danger of such a power:
I sincerely believe . . . that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity under the name of funding is but swindling futurity on a large scale.
Governments have ripped off their citizens, and it appears their love of money is only growing, along with many citizens’ love of the false gods of the State. Governments can now spend their way to hell, and this “triumph of evil” will only continue if “good men do nothing.”
Interesting theory. Your carefully crafted argument assumes that capitalism is somehow sacred. Do you have any scriptural proof for that? In my readings of the New Testament, Christ is a socialist, not a capitalist. We are duty bound to protect free agency and democracy, but not capitalism.
I believe that corrupt governments can do a lot of evil. I did something about it. I elected Barak Obama.
Christ was a socialist, meaning, of course, he believed wealth should be re-distributed by force? Geez, if he believed that, he very easily could have made it happen, don’t you think?
Dflandro,
Modern-day prophets have spoken out against socialism on many occasions, and have supported capitalism.
Private capitalism, the free market, is founded on liberty, the right to contract about our own affairs without threat of force, the right to make choices, and the right to own and control property – a right held in high esteem by the Founders of the U.S., by prophets and made mention of in the scriptures. Yes, these things are sacred. What is our agency without the means to exercise it in the physical world? How we will be stewards when there is no ownership and no control? Where there is no free interaction between us?
If you click on my link you will see a site that endeavours to list all the words of Church leaders on political/economic matters should you wish to study this further.
That’s why I prefer not to use the word capitalist and socialist… Words that people already have definitions for tend to get in the way of teaching principles. “capitalism” is a really misunderstood, tainted word that was invented by socialists if I remember correctly. There’s nothing about the word itself that teaches any principles. At least “Libertarian” is based on “Liberty” and hence has substance. What is “capital” in a moral sense? I say jettison the word. The ‘ism’ of ‘capital ‘is defined who is explaining it to someone else.
Both capitalism and socialism are telestial systems of economics and governance. The celestial system is consecration. The practical application of the law of consecration occurs in the united order.
All telestial systems tend toward excess. In the mercantile capitalism of Dickens’ time, it exploited the poor, polluted the environment, resulted in forced child labor. Profit was stressed over morality. It violates the principle that the (rich) idler should not eat the bread of the (poor) laborer. (D&C 42:42)
Libertarianism says that there is no inherent evil in profit from vice, such as drugs, prostitution, etc., and that government has no role in enforcing morality upon individuals. This leads to corruption as described in Helaman 6:17 and 3 Nephi 6:12.
Under socialism/communism, human agency is restricted in the quest to suppress the exploitation of the poor, resulting in loss of freedom. Control of private property is essential to incentive, happiness, and ultimately civil order (D&C 134:2)
The Lord’s way, under consecration, is that all are stewards, rich and poor. All property is consecrated and distributed equitably according to needs and wants. (D&C 84:112, D&C 104:16) This is only possible with a people who are capable of living the celestial law. We’re not quite there yet, apparently.
All telestial systems will ultimately fail from their inherent contradictions. A long time ago, I completely dismissed the hope of reforming government and focused my efforts on preparedness and establishing Zion in my home. There’s a difference between saving the Constitution and its principles when it hangs by a thread and saving a corrupt federal government ruled by Gadianton robbers.
I sincerely believe that the Lord intends to make a full end of all nations (D&C 87:6) and that the principles of the Constitution will be held inviolate by the latter-day saints in Zion. There will be latter-day saints who will be unprepared and unworthy to enter Zion. They will be prevented from doing so by excessive personal debt (you can’t consecrate what you don’t own). They will not have been faithful in paying their tithing. They won’t have any food storage to sustain them in a time where personal independence and self-reliance are the key. They will have to go to “Egypt” for bread.
I don’t think we can make the case that Jesus was communistic or capitalistic. He didn’t have any interest in reforming the telestial world. His interests were finding the elect and elevating them to the celestial. The law of consecration is the celestial economy.