Resisting or Wielding Power

One of my earliest and most frequently read posts is Leaders vs. Power Mongers. A leader serves, with a love for the people and their united purpose. A power monger seeks power for its sake, for the personal desire for power, for the purpose of wielding it.

It’s a human dilemma that leadership is often granted to those who seek it. And often those who seek it do so to wield power rather than to serve.

I was thinking about this while reading some books recently. I’ve just finished the first two books in Brandon Sanderson’s The Reckoners series: Steelheart and Firefight. In this dystopian world, something appeared in the sky—a bright star?—that no one understands. They call it Calamity. Shortly afterward, a number of humans began to change. They became superhumans in a variety of physics-defying ways. Each one seems to have particular abilities and not-so-obvious weaknesses. They are called Epics.

They aren’t superheroes; they are overlords, villains, and often killers. And they have reigned in terror for more than a decade as the story gets underway.

In the first book, an Epic called Steelheart takes over Newcago (the former city of Chicago). He can turn anything nonliving into steel, which he does with abandon. He does, however, allow most humans to live—if you can call it that—in the remains of the city. And he provides (through another Epic) electricity, and communications—which he uses to monitor everyone.

Our protagonist, David Charleston, is a young man who saw his father killed by Steelheart some ten years earlier. And he has spent his life since then gathering information about Epics, and particularly Steelheart, in an effort for revenge. He joins up with a group of rebels, who have been assassinating minor Epics, to help save humans in their small way. They are called the Reckoners. David joins up with them, and shares with them the sizable stack of data he has accumulated. And he persuades them to go after the high Epics, like Steelheart, which is a difficult and scary goal.

Unlike many dystopian youth novels, the protagonist in this one is very funny, which allows the series to be more entertaining and lighthearted than the circumstances in the story ought to allow. One of his quirks (he has many) is that he tries to explain things with metaphors—and he’s really bad at it. This is an ongoing joke that comes up every few pages for two full books so far.

Example: David is attracted to one of the other Reckoners, an unusual, beautiful weapons expert named Megan, who sometimes finds him amusing and other times annoying. This is in the second book (p. 173):

I needed to say something. Something romantic! Something to sweep her off her feet.

“You’re like a potato!” I shouted after her. “In a minefield.”

She froze in place. Then she spun on me, her face lit by a half-grown fruit. [The fruit weirdly glowed in this city, and was a light source.] “A potato,” she said flatly. “That’s the best you can do? Seriously?”

“It makes sense,” I said. “Listen. You’re strolling through a minefield, worried about getting blown up. And then you step on something, and you think ‘I’m dead.’ But it’s just a potato. And you’re so relieved to find something so wonderful when you expected something so awful. That’s what you are. To me.”

“A potato.”

“Sure. French fries? Mashed potatoes? Who doesn’t like potatoes?”

“Plenty of people. Why can’t I be something sweet, like a cake?”

“Because cake wouldn’t grow in a minefield. Obviously.”

Anyway, his quirks make the series quite a lot of fun.

The main thing going on in the first book is revenge, but that isn’t the overarching theme. By the end of the first book, and throughout the second, the idea has much more to do with choosing whether to wield power or resist the urge to wield it.

It turns out that one of the Reckoners is actually an Epic, but he tries not to use his powers unless absolutely necessary. Because using power changes the Epics. They become irritable, surly, and careless of human life.

In the second book, there is a point where this Reckoner gives in and uses his powers to rescue several dozen people from a burning building. Afterward, he tells David he has to go away for a while to recover. As he explains it, “It’s going to take every bit of my willpower over the next few minutes not to murder these people for inconveniencing me.”

David becomes more and more convinced that, if they could persuade Epics not to use their powers, the Epics would return to their real personalities and become reasonable and decent—especially if that’s how they were before they were made Epics.

In the second book, they are in the water-filled city of Babilar, which used to be New York. A water-controlling Epic, calling herself Regalia, runs the place. She knows about the Reckoners. And she tries to recruit David to her side. She has him out on the water, and summons Calamity—the inexplicable light in the sky that is still mysterious—to turn David into an Epic:

Was I now an Epic?

Yes. I felt it was true. What had just happened between me and Calamity was no trick. But still, I had to test it. I had to know for absolute certain.

And then I would kill myself, quickly, before the desires consumed me.

I reached out to touch the water.

I felt something.

Well, I felt the water, of course. I mean something else. Something inside of me. A stirring….

Take it, a voice said in my head. A quiet, distant voice, but a real one. Take this power. It is yours.

I…

Take it!

“No.”

The tingling vanished.

I blinked at the waters. Calamity’s light had retreated, and everything looked normal again.

I stumbled to my feet and turned to face Regalia.

She smiled. “Ah, it takes hold!”

“Nah,” I said. “I’m a washing machine at a gun show.”

She blinked, looking totally befuddled. “…What did you just say?”

“Washing machine?” I said. “Gun show? You know. Washing machines don’t use guns, right? No fingers. So if they’re at a gun show, there’s nothing they’d want to buy. Anyway, I’m good here. Not interested.”

“Not…interested. It doesn’t matter if you’re interested or not! You don’t get a choice.”

“Made one anyway,” I said. “Thanks, though. Nice of you to think of me.”

Apparently there is a choice about whether to accept power and wield it.

Later in the story, the dilemma is heightened. I hate to give spoilers, but let’s just say that giving in to power out of fear leads to the evildoing, but when love is a stronger motivator than fear, the real person isn’t overtaken by the evil side of wielding power. The person can wield power without self-corruption, and do good.

I’m wondering if that is applicable in our world. If we could get the powerful to stop wielding their power—to stop irritably disregarding the lives of individual humans around them—and keep strictly within the bounds of the proper role of government, then they would stop corrupting themselves and come back to helping society.

And if we could—at every level—find those leaders who love the people, and love to serve, and take on power only for that purpose, then we could work our way back out of tyranny, poverty, and savagery, and recover freedom, prosperity, and civilization.

Preparing the Ground, Part I

When is the best time to plant a tree? Twenty years ago. When is the next best time? Today.

I’d like to offer a variation on that theme. When is the best time to have Mitt Romney as President? Since 2009. When is the next best time to have Mitt Romney as President? Since 2013. When is the next best time to have Mitt Romney as President? From January 2017 on.

But I’m not planting that tree. I am not hoping he runs again.

It matters who is president—because a president can do so much damage to our country, our freedom, our economy, and our society. We have seen that deterioration in action more during the current administration than any in US history.

But the problem isn’t on the shoulders of a single person. The current climate in this country is not about an ineffectual, America-hating socialist; it’s about an electorate who chose an ineffectual, America-hating socialist—when they had the option of an extremely successful executive, with a long record of turning difficult situations into successes, who lives the highest level of civilization, honoring God, prioritizing family, and giving service generously.

 

There are people who are saying, “I told you so” at this point. It is true that Romney was right—about Obamacare, about taxes, about international conditions and America’s best role in a dangerous world, about, well, pretty much everything.

But there are also people, still, among conservatives who claim the problem was that Romney wasn’t a good enough candidate to beat the known-to-be-bad-for-America Obama. These include some names I would like to trust on conservatism: Glenn Beck, Mark Levin, various Facebook fellow conservative soldiers, Tea Party associates, the county GOP chair…. The main claim is that, since Romneycare (Massachusetts medical insurance plan) was the blueprint for Obamacare, Romney couldn’t possibly be anything but a liberal being shoved down our throats by RINO party leadership.

The lie about "Romneycare" came from the Obama campaign. That ought to be a clue. If you need a refresher, I wrote a seven-part assessment of Romney the candidate near the end of 2011, called “Measuring Mitt.” Most pertinent might be part VI on MassachusettsCare. Anyone who looks into it can see one thing really clearly: Obama and minions patterned NOTHING on anything that could be called Romney policy. Romney worked with Democrats to get policy that would be the most conservative possible—because that would be best for the people. And he succeeded in changing every organization he ever touched from debt-prone to profitable.

We admire George Washington because he was an honorable man, who gave selflessly for the country he loved, working always toward freedom rather than personal aggrandizement. Washington happened to be the wealthiest of colonists at the time of the founding. But it was not his wealth that was memorable; it was his character.

Lincoln started out in poverty and worked his way up, with much opposition. He was made for such a time. It was also his character that we admire. His strength, his dedication to principle, his love of the goodness of our country as a whole. He did things that were divisive—because to be good required division from those who preferred the continuation of a great evil. You can't compromise with evil and remain whole. Dedication to principles of truth and freedom gave the American people something to hold to in wholeness.

Reagan, who earned his significant wealth in Hollywood, is also remembered for his character. He stood strong and bold against evil. He honored America’s goodness, without even a hint of shame for country love. And he spoke directly and clearly to the good hearts of good Americans.

Our best presidents had valuable qualities, made for such times as they faced.

Romney has the experience, ability, and character to precisely fit this decade. He has the attitude of servant leadership that we admired in Washington. We simply would not be in much of the messes we’re in, if we had chosen him instead of the ignominious alternative. Yet many of the best conservatives among us missed the obvious and said, “Not good enough!”

I do not trust people so recently blind to suddenly see the light. They don’t even yet recognize their error.

So, please, don’t “draft Romney.” He is available to help wherever needed, in various campaigns, perhaps in a cabinet position later. Unlike most people in politics, he is motivated by a desire to serve. We can still let him, without putting him and his family through yet another “you’re not good enough” campaign, which is not likely to pull in the masses of even less informed voters.

I do not know who the candidate should be. No democrat should be allowed to win again in my lifetime; they have proven incapable of leading America and Americans. So that is a given. Almost any Republican would be better. But better than a democrat is hardly enough to move us from our sinking southward position, back up to the northern hemisphere of freedom, prosperity, and civilization. We could use a great man, made for the time. One who is so obviously right that every voter can be held responsible for an informed vote.

I’m leaning toward Ted Cruz. He is bold, and principled, and clearly willing to stand up against great opposition. There may be others. I pray the Lord will lead us to someone meant for the even more difficult job of restoration-after-destruction.

But my greater concern is the blinded society.

In the metaphor I began with, it’s about preparing the ground for planting. The current soil is in great need of nutrients.  The culture needs to be…cultivated.

Pointing out the blindness took this whole post. So it’s going to take a second part to consider how to get better cultural conditions.

What Is Power?

During one of our Sunday lessons this week, the teacher (a good friend of mine, who embarrasses me by saying I’m one of the smartest people she knows, but who is also very smart in various less sedentary ways) put this word equation on the board:

Belief + Action = Faith, and Faith = Power

This was a religious lesson, about not feeling ashamed that your belief is not yet knowledge; if it is a strong enough belief that you then act on it, trusting it to be true, then that is faith. And it is by faith that the world was created and all miracles happen.

But the Faith = Power part intrigued me. I have written here before about the word power; specifically about the difference between leaders and power mongers. Leaders serve, while power mongers act in ways to increase/protect their power over others. So I wondered if this equation could be applied also to power in a more general sense, or whether there is an actual difference.

Phenomenal Cosmic Power; Itty-bitty Living Space

What is power? In a lot of youth literature, people have special powers, maybe magical or super powers, or at least special talents and abilities beyond normal humans. And then there’s the dilemma that, “with great power comes great responsibility,” (according to Spiderman’s Uncle Ben). I don’t think I want to deal with that kind of issue today. I want to deal with something closer to real world power. I went to the handy dictionary. There are a lot of layers in defining power. So I think I’ll pick and choose how I mean it here.

Power is the ability to act, produce, accomplish, do. It can also be the ability to influence the behavior of others, which could be either very good or very bad. In the world of politics—which most of us would prefer to avoid but can’t if we care about our own freedom to act, produce, accomplish, and do—power might also mean the authority to act, or to control the actions of others. Such power is like fire, important for use in certain limited circumstances, but dangerous in the wrong hands or in the wrong situations.

I’ve previously asserted that seeking power is evil, but I think I need to clarify the definition, because having the power to do good, and wanting that ability, is not a bad thing. The power to act in a positive way is good, but power to act in a negative way is, well, bad.

So how do we make sure that we’re seeking power for good? And how do we prevent others from gaining power for evil?

Power needs a source. So if we’re going to a good source—THE Good Source—then we can be pretty certain our power will be for good. If you have something Good to do, and you ask God for the power to do it, when that power is granted, you know you didn’t supply it yourself; you put in the work, but you got the ideas, the energy, the opportunities—the power—from the source for good. There’s a sense of humility in the heart. If you’re missing the sense of humility and thankfulness, and in its place find a sense of superiority or entitlement, you’re probably seeking the wrong kind of power.

I don’t think there’s any problem with wanting power from God to do His will. That is very different from power mongering—loving power for self. But power to do God’s will is always about serving His children, even when leading and influencing them. The evil kind of power is about controlling, rather than serving. Originally, I said it this way:

A power monger is the polar opposite of a leader. He/she uses coercion as a basic tool. A power monger uses deception to gain power, not trusting honest persuasion to get people to give it to him/her. A power monger doesn’t recognize God-given rights, but only the privileges he/she decides to grant, usually to those most likely to return political favors (money, votes, support). A power monger can coerce at any level from family to international, but those with an appetite for power generally seek it over a larger and larger circle of minions.

A power monger sees him/herself as elite and superior over the other lower beings, as opposed to seeing him/herself among fellow citizens as a leader would do. A power monger doesn’t avoid chaos, but rather uses it (sometimes even creates it purposefully) as an opportunity to cause more people to succumb to the desire for protection, which he/she offers. A power monger is selfish, doing good for others only if it will increase his/her personal power.

I think the Spherical Model helps explain the difference. Those who choose to dwell only in the southern hemisphere, in either statist or chaotic tyranny, think there are only two choices: control others, or be controlled by others. They seem perversely unaware of the entire northern hemisphere where people work and live freely among one another—using limited government to help with the limited times people fail to consider one another’s rights and self-govern. It’s the hemisphere where freedom, prosperity, and civilization thrive. It’s not a dog-eat-dog world there; it’s a mutually respectful world. Unlike the power mongers in the tyranny hemisphere, leaders in the freedom hemisphere must be servant leaders, who lead by persuasion, information, and example.

Why don’t we simply choose that? Some of us do. But we live in a world where we do not have a critical mass of people choosing the better way.

I believe God used the faith of righteous people to establish this country in the first place. God has power to do anything. I believe He can bring us back to the freedom zone; I do not know if that is His plan, or if some sort of disastrous version of natural consequences is more likely.

But this will continue to be true:

Faith in God → Power to Do Good

We can act on our desires to do good in our homes and communities and country, and He will give us power to accomplish enough good that we can still enjoy many of the blessings of that northern hemisphere that so many others are too blind to see. If we act on faith, miracles will still happen.