Prologue.
Here is my most coherent manifesto yet, and expresses my ideas on the world, and on the ideas of theonomy and symphonia.
On the World.
God creates everything in the world, though humans have free will, and God is the reason for everything. Why should civilization exist? Why should humanity exist? Why listen to emotions? Why does empathy have any value? Why do humans have any value above the common ant? Why shouldn't one True Tyrant destroy absolutely everything? Why follow duties? Where are duties being derived if the world is godless and devoid of anything beyond the process of ecosystem? Well, the answer is in God! How do we follow God? In the Church! Which Church? The Eastern Orthodox Church! And upon the earth, the state exists for some moral ends, and is inhibited in some way through charters to sustain and prolong the existence of the state to perform its moral obligations, this is seen in the Magna Carta, Confucian Mandate of Heaven, or US Constitution, there is a moral order prescribed, whether it is divine or not, and a means of upholding it, whether in democracy, or just kingship, or elective monarchy, et cetera, as is the disposition of the state. Though without God, such as in the Japanese Constitution, is wrong and arbitrary, as they have no ontological foundation for these things without God. And humanity cannot live without a state of some kind, or at least some kind of leadership and culture, as even the Hadza have prestige-prowess leadership and riots are an example of the egotism and rival of man devoid of leadership, and in this regard, the Christian king is obligated to behave with morality upon existence. Because leadership will always exist, and because God is real, the leader must be Christians or suffer the metaphysical consequences, and if he is not Christian, a preacher must convert him, and if the king rejects, then he is an ontologically evil king, as he rejects Christ, who is God, who is Goodness inseparably. And the role of the Christian king is the stewardship of the state in the defense of the innocent. The state exists to protect the innocent, and the state must prolong itself to further protect the innocent. The prolonged state exists to uphold moral obligation for as long as possible, and must be prolonged to uphold moral obligation, and prolonged with the family unit and Christian culture, per the writings of Augustine, Thomas Sowell, and Dave Popenoe. But of course, the Church cannot exist as the state, as this would corrupt the Church, and so, the Church must inform the state as a superior of morality, but the state governs and sustains. And moving into the economics of this theonomy. Many oppose this vague, personified notion of "capitalism", as if that means anything. Capitalism? Well that's quite lazy in criticism of modernity, especially since capitalism is just the lack of any coercive force in the economy, and all ills typically emerge from state intervention, and any exploitation is a consequence of human fallibility, seeing as capitalism is the lack of a system and a reflection of mankind, whether he has or lacks God shall determine success and moral failure. It isn't like socialism is of any particular morality as well, as the human fallibility is simply monopolized in a totalitarian state, as opposed to democratized by communities and individuals, but the problem of human sin and godlessness persists irrespective. If material acquisition is all which matters, then one may say "I, myself, am the sole proletariat, and everyone around me is bourgeois, and depriving me of material, and thus I must slaughter and destroy everyone to bring about a utopia where I am served and obeyed.", as it entails that if material aspiration is the highest pursuit, then why would anyone care about collectives or utopia, when the mere egoist could establish his own tyranny, and slaughter all who oppose as the counter-revolutionaries of the Revolution of Me. But of course, why is material even inherently valuable? While every wants a nice car and house, why not slaughter and torture everyone to acquire them if they are so high? Who said they were so high? Why not commit suicide in this regard? Why should humanity exist? And this is my point about those who snuggle theism into these arguments, and presuppose a moral order selectively, without any reason to follow, or why those who espouse such materialism are even correct. Why pursue material? Why not suicide? Of course, Camus tried and failed to answer this, essentially providing a non-answer, and has been unable to answer the question of suicide, as only God provides reason to exist, and anything else is arbitrary in their ontology, as they lack any substantiation for any claim of value or meaning, and there's no reason to follow these people. And so, my point emerges so that capitalism is an amoral, albeit highly effective, method of resource allocation that is best left to itself without state oversight over the markets, but state oversight over the humans in the endeavor to protect the innocent and for the state to prolong itself to further remain steadfast in these endeavors. In this regard, the state must never engage in immorality. Neither promoting immorality, such as homosexuality, or engaging in it, such as taxation. Taxation is theft, and is not just. The must not murder anyone, murder being defined as the taking of innocent lives. The state exists for the sole purpose of defending the innocent, propagating Christianity, and sustaining itself to further remain steadfast in the previous two endeavors. Where money is derived? Fines, and voluntary donations, and harnessing the markets, such as state investments and such. I quite like Tolstoy, but I feel his ideas of anarchism are only applicable in contexts of monastic communities. Even so, mankind will always have leaders, and humanity will always be subject to kings, and so, I feel it is in the interest of moral and benevolent government that the state exists, the the king is just and good, bound by a moral charter. Obviously, history is simply a matter of sovereigns commanding their forces, as every historical event which moved civilizations was one moved by sovereign forces, and begins with one individual, or a small group of individuals, this is the case among primitive peoples as well, who have their kings. Riots are a reflection of man without sovereigns, just aimless bursts of egotism and noise, really. I am absolutely willing to defend that the notion of taxation is indeed a form of theft, because it is coercion of funds, and if the state is willing to steal in this regard, then why not rob from anyone? Maybe liquidate the assets of criminals, or implement fines as minor penalties, but the theft of capital from innocent peoples, irrespective of their standing as either wealthy or poor, is unjust. Just war is not murder, to clarify. Murder is the taking of innocent lives. Just war is simply another means of defending the innocent, just as the First Crusade defended the Christians against the barbaric Seljuk Turks. Augustine put it quite nicely, “Peace is not sought in order to start war, but war is waged in order to attain peace.”, in this manner, as the moral state is not Islamic, and so the Jews, and the apostates, and even the Muslims, are permitted to reside in the nations unmolested, though beholden to the laws of the moral state, which entails that lower jihad is forbidden, as it is murder and compulsion, and Islam is to be condemned, albeit tolerated.