Today is Foundations of Freedom Thursday! That means we will take a look at questions from the audience- Truman proposed big government intervention to labor strikes; what role does Government have in private sector union strikes? And next, what questions should you ask of your politicians?
Do historical insights and biblical teachings hold the key to understanding today's cultural issues? Join us as we take a deep dive into the role of government in private employment, particularly the intricacies of union strikes, through the lens of faith and history. We look back at pivotal moments like Truman's post-WWII dilemma and Reagan's showdown with air traffic controllers to dissect the delicate balance between government intervention and the free-market. In this thought-provoking journey, we'll unravel the complex ties between individual rights, the responsibility of judicial appointments, and the weighty implications of public-private partnerships that flirt with crony capitalism.
As we forge connections between moral values and economic policies, we'll reveal how a politician's worldview can shape their approach to issues like immigration and property rights. It's not just about casting a vote; it's about understanding the underlying principles that drive those in power to make decisions impacting our daily lives. We dissect the correlation between a leader's stance on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and their economic ideology. This episode promises to enlighten, challenge, and inspire you to see the interplay of morality and economy with new clarity, guiding you in making informed decisions in the public sphere.
You've found your way to the intersection of faith and culture. This is the place where we talk about the hot topics going on in the culture, but from a biblical, historical and constitutional perspective. That's so rare today. Most people today it's just how they feel. It's just what's popular. They mostly look to other people for how to take their position on whatever's going on in the culture. The issues being debated are all about. Not here at Walbuilders. Here at WallBuilders we say, okay, what can history teach us about this? There's times in history where people have done things the right way and gotten good results. We can learn from that. Done things the wrong way, gotten bad results we can learn from that. So we look at history. We of course, look at the Constitution here in America. That's our job as good citizens. We're going to live under the American Constitution and play by those rules. But most importantly, we look Biblically. What can we learn from the Bible about the right way to do things? How do we learn from the Bible, the instruction manual given to us from the Creator about how to treat our neighbors, how to form our societies, how to raise our families, how to take care of our property, how to run our businesses, all of those things. And it's just wonderful to know that He's given us the answers to all the tough questions. There's nothing that we're facing that there's not an answer there. So we appreciate the opportunity to dive into a lot of those issues. And we appreciate you being a part of the program by listening, by sharing it with your friends and family. Be a force multiplier, take links to the program, share it out there, let people know about it, but also by participating, send it in questions. You've got questions that you can send us radio@wallbuilders. com. It's radio@wallbuilders. com We appreciate you sending those in to us. Alright, David and Tim, let's jump in. We've got a lot of questions to get to today and the first one's going to come from Virginia and it's Adam in Virginia. He said Hello, dear friends, I've been reading a biography about Harry Truman by David McCullough. After World War II ended, Harry Truman began his peacetime presidency. Labor union strikes broke out all across the country. The railroad strikes seemed to bring the country to a standstill and Harry Truman proposed big government intervention to the strikes. He even proposed an emergency bill to Congress to draft the striking workers into the army. Can you please tell me what proper role, if any, a president and the federal government has in private sector union strikes. Thanks a million, Adam in Virginia. Alright, guys, really good at Foundations of Freedom Thursday, Constitutional question here. Proper role of the president and the federal government when it comes to union strikes.David Barton:
Yeah, it's a great question and the question also has some biblical overtones, on even economics. I mean, one of the things you go back to Matthew 20, is Jesus to talk about hiring practices. He says that every individual has a right to negotiate with the employer. Well, what happens when you get into groups, like labor unions have done, you've moved away from that individual right to negotiate. And Jesus in that parable talks about how the several different individuals came through. The employer negotiated a different contract with different individuals, even though they were doing the same job. They didn't all get paid the same or same amount of time or whatever per hour, but he said that's your right to negotiate individually. What happened was progressives got together and started using unions as a tool to blackmail businesses and, rather than negotiating individually, they now say we're going to shut you down. And then, worse than that, progressive government and made unions a part of government. And so right now it is virtually impossible to fire a federal employee, and it doesn't matter who the president is going to be, they're going to inherit 2.3 million employees and cleaning the swamp is not that easy a deal because you can't fire them. It's like in New York City, where they have unions and they have what's called the rubber room and there's 6 to 700 teachers that they pay not to teach. They can't fire the teachers, they're incompetent or they've committed egregious behavior. They kick them out of the classroom, but they can't fire them under the labor contract with the unions, and so what you have is you really have blackmail going on at that level. Now, one of the things we saw Reagan do back in his days was when the union tried to shut down the transportation and the federal safety that went with airlines. Reagan just abolished the union and privatized the movement, and so we're not going to have a private group come in and shut down the government, what the government is supposed to do. And so one of the first problems is not where the government should get involved in unions is whether you should have unions. Now, you have a right to collectively organize and get together and make groups, no question about that but when it comes to using that to blackmail businesses or to undermine the free market or to start sitting standards that violate pre-market principles, you've got a problem. And so that's the first thing is government, and, by the way, nearly everywhere you have a union, it is government, protected, state or federal. Either way, it's usually the government doing that, so the government is creating problem that comes back to bite them. Government shouldn't be involved in private sector kind of employment, but nor should they be involved in protecting unions and giving them the protection at the state level. I think it's now only 6.2% of the nation belongs to a union. That's not what the free market wants, that's not what the people want but you'll find that 6.2% can shut down Amazon and all their services, or shut down UPS or FedEx or whatever it is, and that was never the intent or the design. So you have Truman, who's a big government guy. I mean, he was a literal big government guy and he's using big government to solve stuff, and that's the way it is with progressives. Now, one thing about Truman he loved this country and he loved the Lord, but he was a liberal progressive and he thought big government was the right solution, and so he uses big government, which is never the right solution, to doing these kind of things. So, while I really admire several things about Truman, there's several things where that I think Constitutionally and Philosophically, within that Constitutional framework, he got it flat wrong, and this is one of those areas. But the bigger area is, even at the state level, you shouldn't be having governments protect and empower and authorize these private collective groups and give them the power they have. We've seen a couple of decisions in the Supreme Court in the last couple years where that one of the tactics that unions use was to be able to destroy businesses as part of the negotiating tactics, and the Supreme Court this year stepped in. We had this on a Good News Friday and the court said no, you can't destroy private business as a tactic for negotiating for wages or hours or whatever. You can't destroy something to get what you want, and so at least the court is starting to come back to protecting businesses, which is the free market position. But I think Truman got that wrong all across the board. But before Truman got it wrong in the 1920s, states started getting it wrong by what they're doing to protect unions and empower and authorize unions.Tim Barton:
Well, dad, I think one of the things, too, that might be relevant for our current position is we're seeing some of these public/ private partnerships where the government is working with some of these private businesses, whether it be a Moderna or a Pfizer, alright? Some of these companies, when COVID happened, and right, when you look at big pharma and you're seeing government get far more involved. In fact, we saw government picking winners and losers during COVID, when there was a shutdown, and a lot of this was state government or even local government, where they were choosing what businesses to stay open and what businesses to close. Anytime you have the federal government picking winners and losers or picking who their partners are going to be, there certainly is some danger in that. This is maybe a little different, although there could be some overlap even when it comes to part of the military industrial complex and, for example, Lockheed Martin. There's a major facility in Fort Worth, Texas, very close to where we are, and, I mean, HUGE, HUGE contract with the government and they have to bid, and so there is more involved when, certainly the government when it comes to military supplies, they're going to have to get those from somewhere, and so they're going to engage with private businesses on some level. But when it's not done through a free market, competitive bidding system, when the government is picking winners and losers, when it comes to big pharma, when it comes to who can stay open and who can;t, this is where you definitely see some major issues, that that's even beyond the union. But when it comes, I think, back to the heart of the question of what role does the government have inside of private business, it's very, very limited and one of the main things the government was supposed to do was to have a market structure and system and, rick, I know you have talked about this in many different presentations kind of the role of the federal government. But really the federal government is supposed to create an atmosphere and environment where the free market, where entrepreneurship can thrive. And it's also part of why you go back to guys like Noah Webster, the guy that gave us Webster's dictionary. But consider one of the founding fathers from the American Revolution going forward, very involved in the foundation of America. But he was one of the guys who was arguing in favor of getting patents to preserve people's creative ideas and protect them so that if they come up with an idea, somebody can't come along, some business can't come along and steal it. Well, that's part of the role of the government. When it comes to private practice, to private companies, is there supposed to protect the environment, the market to allow freedom to function. But, they're not supposed to pick winners and losers, and that's ultimately far more, I'm afraid, of what we are seeing happen under more recent governments, both on the state and federal level, than the proper role of government, which is to protect its citizens, and that means protecting their private property, which also means protecting their businesses.David Barton:
And, Tim, I want to jump in on something you mentioned. With the public-private partnership that's become a very glamorous term and that sounds really good. Get the government and private working together. Cooperating, man, that sounds great. That needs to be a repugnant term. A public-private partnership is a repugnant term because by classical definition, fascism means the government RUNNING the private businesses for the government's ends. So, like what you're talking about big pharma and other things, this is the government taking private businesses and running them, saying here's what we want, here's what you produce, not in the sense of bidding on contracts, but in the sense of choosing winners and losers. And so today fascism is seen as a bad term. You know, we get called fascist and conservatives get called fascist. Most people don't have a clue how to define that term. But it is; When the government steps in to private business and starts directing private business and starts picking winners and losers, that literally is fascism and that's what they -that's a glamorous term they've now given for fascism in these private- public partnerships and that's not a good deal. So people need to be repulsed by that term when they hear it and just think fascism because that's that's the old definition. Just because they gave a new name doesn't mean it's a better deal, it's not. And I mean you're exactly right on choosing winners and losers. Big pharma and PPP is that's great stuff.Rick Green:
Yeah, and Dave, you know I mean what you're talking about is exactly what we've said for years about jurisdictions there's a certain jurisdiction and a responsibility and a duty for the market to handle, businesses to handle their own, be responsible for their own government. When government intervenes or when you, even when you just partner, now you're overlapping, you're getting into somebody else's jurisdiction, and what Tim saying is exactly what happens you actually end up not only is it, is it, you know, does it end up bad for everybody, the, the cronyism starts and now it becomes the winners and losers are who gave you the most money in the last campaign, and then you're favoring the people that support your political agenda versus the others and it just becomes a mess, and that's why you government shouldn't be involved in those things at all for sure. So let's take a quick break, guys, we'll be back. We've got a lot more questions from the audience. You're listening to The WallBuilders Show show on Foundations of Freedom Thursday. Have you noticed the vacuum of leadership in America? We're looking around for leaders of principle to step up, and too often no one is there. God is raising up a generation of young leaders with a passion for impacting the world around them. They're crying out for the mentorship and leadership training they need. Patriot Academy was created to meet that need. Patriot Academy graduates now serve in state capitals around America, in the halls of Congress, in business, in the film industry, in the pulpit, in every area of the culture. They're leading effectively and impacting the world around them. Patriot Academy is now expanding across the nation, and now is your chance to experience this life-changing week that trains champions to change the world. Visit www. patriotacademy. com for dates and locations. Our core program is still for young leaders 16 to 25 years old, but we also now have a citizen track for adults. So visit the website today to learn more. Help us fill the void of leadership in America. Join us in training champions to change the world at www. patriotacademy. com. Welcome back to the WallBuilders Show. It's Foundations of Freedom Thursday. You can send your questions into us radio@ wallbuilders. Merrill sent a question in. He said I heard on one of The WallBuilders Show podcasts David Barton talked about four questions we should ask of every politician. What are those four questions? I cannot remember which podcast I heard it on and where to find it again. I want to share with my government class. Many will be voting for the first time this year. Thanks, Merrill. Merrill, great timing on this, because you know, we got primaries, caucuses and all that coming up and so people are already going to be voting in those, those primaries which, by the way, let's just remind everybody, you have way more influence when you vote in the primary than you do in November. The pool of voters is smaller and you are setting the tables, kind of like getting in the kitchen a little early and being there to make the things that everybody else gets to choose from when they show up for the reception. So instead of just showing up and you only got a couple options you don't like, this is your chance to get in the kitchen and make the stuff you really enjoy and you provide the options for everybody else. That's why it's so important to vote in those primaries. So, David, four questions for candidates.David Barton:
This really goes back to voting priorities. On an earlier program we covered when you come to election time, what are voting priorities? Because there's going to be a good 10, 15, 20 things that'll be on the polling list. You know what's ranking number one in this state and two and three and four across the nation, whatever. When a Christian goes to vote, there are some Biblical standards that should be used when you vote for candidate and federal candidates especially. So, president, US senator, US congressman, one of the first questions you should always ask comes out of Isaiah 1: 26. Isaiah 1: 26, God's talking to Isaiah. The nation of Israel is in a sorry state. Isaiah wants to get them back. They need a change. And God tells him in Isaiah 1: 26, alright, I'm going to change the nation, and here's how I'll do it. I'll do it by giving you judges like you had at the beginning and lawyers like you had at the first. And so it's interesting God says the righteousness of the nation is dependent on the type of judges that you have. So anytime you vote for US Senate, you ought to be saying, hey, what kind of judges am I going to get for this candidate? Don't really care what he does on defense as much as judges, don't care what he does on economics as much as judges. Because judges, if you get the wrong judges, then they take control of defense and economics and education and everything else. So the first thing for a president, the first thing for any senator, is where are you on judges? Will you give us a ritual intent judges that will uphold the original meaning of the Constitution and thus preserve freedoms? And then we can go from there. So that's the first thing, congressman, the same thing. Where are you on judiciary? Will you reign in the judiciary? Will you pass the acts necessary to keep the judges under control? In some states they have this. There's 24 states that have what they call the Missouri system. The Missouri system does not allow citizens to elect their judges. The legislature chooses the judges or the governor chooses the judges. South Carolina is in the midst of trying to reform the judicial system, because that very red, very pro-life state had a group of judges last cycle that said no, we're going to overturn the abortion laws. That's not the will of the people, that's not the will of the state Constitution in South Carolina. So in South Carolina I'd be asking the governor what are you going to do about judges? What kind of judges will I get? I don't want the ones the American Bar Association tells you to put on there. I want to know if they read the Constitution and know what it means. And the same with legislators in South Carolina say hey, are you going to reform this judicial system so that we can have elected judges and make them accountable to We The People? And states need elected judges, no question. So that's the number one issue is where are you on judiciary? Because if you get the wrong judges in, they'll take the rest of your liberties away. The other three issues would come from the Ten Commandments and the Ten Commandments, this is actually God's top ten. When God gave the Ten Commandments, He actually gave 613 commands to the nation of Israel. And the Ten Commandments and Exodus 23, they're described as the tenor of the law. In other words, if I were to take the 613 laws and reduce them to 10 basic principles, here's the basic principles. So the essence of the law is in these 10 commandments, which is why it is so often displayed in courts or so often was displayed in courts and taught in classrooms. This is the essence of the law. So the first thing in there right up top, it says I am the Lord, thy God. He starts with acknowledge Me. You need to acknowledge Me first. So the question to ask is okay, the person I'm trying to elect, are they God conscious? Are they conscious of accountability to God? Do they acknowledge God as Lord? Because if they don't, that means they're going to be the God when they get in there and they'll use their own standards, their own viewpoints. They won't uphold inalienable rights because they don't recognize the inalienable rights that come in from God. It comes from the majority. So that becomes a very important point. So you want to check on judges. You want to check on are they God conscious? Because if they're not, you won't get protection for your God given rights. And next command, going through 10 commandments, it says don't commit adultery. Now what's adultery? Adultery is sexual relationships outside of marriage between a man and a woman. What that is is biblical definition of gender and morality. God is saying look, I want sex confined to a relationship between a man and a woman inside of marriage. So, check where they are on sexual morality. What are they? If they're into 130 different genders, like they are in Europe right now, that's a real problem because if you don't recognize basic biblical morality, there's no basis for them to make laws that will apply to all the people all the time. So pick and choose. And the last thing that you find in the 10 commandments, I think is a real guiding principle, is thou shalt not kill, and Hebrew it says thou shall not commit murder. Murder is shedding innocent blood. It doesn't prohibit killing, because the Bible itself authorizes capital punishment, but only for those who shed guilty blood. If you're guilty of shedding innocent blood, capital punishment. But the Bible says don't commit murder, don't shed innocent blood. Well, that's, that's abortion, real simple. So there's your four issues. Check on where they are with judges. Are they God conscious? Do they believe in biblical sexual morality, standards and genders, and where are they on abortion? If you get those four things, anything else you get after that is a bonus. Where there are on economics, where they're on school choice, where they are on anything else, those are the big four that will identify worldview and that's every election school board through president of the United States.Tim Barton:
All right, dad, let me throw in a few other thoughts. We you've done a lot of talks on this. Rick and I, we've, had a lot of conversations and give a lot of presentations, unfolding this a little more for people. And one of the reasons this standard becomes so important. The Bible tells us in Proverbs 14: 34 that righteousness exalts a nation but sin is a reproach to people, what makes a nation great is righteousness. When Donald Trump initially ran with a slogan, make America great again, that was a great slogan, genuinely great slogan. But you can only make her great again if you know what made her great in the first place. And if we don't recognize what makes a nation great is righteousness, then we will be pursuing and promoting the wrong things as individuals. To go a little further, Jesus even said Matthew 6:33, but seek ye first the kingdom of God and his Righteousness, and then all these things will be added to you. Righteousness should be a pursuit and an interest for us. So then it comes to the question of how do we determine righteousness? And, dad, this is where they did. For us, it's an easy standard to look at when God has given all the laws to the people and there's 10 of them written in stone. Well, these 10 were kind of unique, right, we could argue all the laws were important. Sure they were, and God dealt with all of the issues, but he didn't write all of them in stone, but some of them he did, and it was the basis of morality of all of what has become Western civilization. But those were standards that reflected righteousness. Also, the reason judges important is because the Bible very clearly talks about judges Impacting their righteousness of the land, and I'm echoing again, dad, part of what you said. I just want to unfold this a little bit more because these thoughts are not just arbitrarily us choosing verses that we like and we think are important. It really is a reflection of things the Bible talks about when it comes to Righteousness, and righteousness is what exalts a nation, and so these are the standards we look at. Which also, if you even think about Exodus 18:21, when, Jethro comes to Moses and right speaking, giving wisdom of God to Moses, He said Moses, you, you do this by yourself. You need some help. You should choose out of among you people, right, men of truth, that that that hate covetousness, that fear God, able men. It's interesting by the way it started with the word capable or able men, because it needed to be people that are capable of handling the job, that have skill, that have ability, but then they need to fear God, then they need to be men of truth and they hate covetousness. Well, that's another really good standard and this is something certainly we're talking about from a Christian, biblical perspective. But the reason that even some of these standards matter is there might be some people that say but we care about economics, right? We're recognizing that is where the issue is in our nation, like Bidenflation is a real thing, we know the nation has issues. Or people might look and go okay, immigration, major problem, we need to close the southern border. We could go through a lot of these categories and what I would point out is the people that understand the standard of righteousness are going to have the highest percentage of being right on these other issues, because getting the issues of righteousness correct, dad, as you alluded to it is the best measurement of their worldview, and if they believe that life is sacred, that God is the Author and Giver of life, they're much more likely to believe in other things, like in the 10 Commandments, where it says don't steal, don't cover with somebody else, they're much more likely to protect private property, which means that they're probably not going to agree with things like in California where they're saying, hey, as long as you didn't steal up over $1,000, right, if it's less than $999, we think it's okay. No, that's the wrong philosophy. But if they don't acknowledge that there is a God, that our rights come from God, that God is the Author and Giver of life, that God is the one that determined male and female, that God established every relation, that God established human sexuality, for, infine, the confines of marriage between a man and woman, if we don't get some of those basics right when it comes to righteousness, they're not going to be right on so many of the other issues. But those initial issues of righteousness, dad, as you mentioned, those top four, those can be the best reflection of where they will stand on the other issues. And this is just I mean, dad, you've talked about it in the literally decades that you have done this, that has been a consistent stand that you've seen time and time again, and actually there's even some really good metrics that you can measure to see where people line up on these issues.David Barton:
Yeah, literally, Tim. There are very good measurements. One of the things we've documented over the years is, if you take 435 members of Congress, there are groups that measure where they are on the life issue, inalienable right, life comes from God and measure their voting record. And there are groups that care not a whit about social conservative issues. They only care about economics and so Americans for prosperity, et cetera. One of the really interesting things is one group only looks at where people are on economic issues. One looks at where they are on the moral issues and it's nearly a one-to-one comparison that if they are good on the life issues, they will be good on economic issues. If they're bad on the life issues, they're nearly always bad on the economic issues, because that's the whole worldview. As you were saying, Tim, that reflects the whole worldview. So if you don't recognize things like God and rights come from God and that means protecting life, you're not gonna recognize that money is a private property and that is God-given and we're supposed to protect that, and so they'll vote to give away your money when it's your private property. So that's a great analysis is just remember that how a person votes on life pretty much reflects how they vote on economic issues as well. Economic issues doesn't reflect how they'll vote on social issues. Social issues reflect how they'll vote on economic issues. Don't leave those moral issues out. When you look at people running for office, use them as the top tier.Rick Green:
Meryl, that was a great question and your timing was perfect. As we're going into the election days for the primary and as we close out today, I wanted to thank Chris from Kansas City for great email. Gonna share it with everybody. He said David, Rick and Tim, first off, I'm a long-time listener of WallBuilders Live. I listen to you on the Bot Radio Network when possible, but often catch you up through your podcast. I'm grateful you're available through both options. Recently you were responding to a listener's comments about the city and country mindset. The conversation turned to the value of getting outside, away from the cities, and the benefits of enjoying the great outdoors physical activity. And then Tim added lawn mowing and how that clears the cobwebs for some people. As I heard that, I laughed because that's me and that's what I was doing at that moment. In fact, I listened to you almost exclusively when I mow in my lawn. Every week for between two to five hours, the intersection of faith and culture meets in my yard. I'm getting a great workout for my body and mind. I know and have met many of your guests, so when listening to you I feel like I'm among friends spurring each other along. You've provided me with so much inspiration as I seek to influence culture with biblical principles. I have no question right now. I just wanna thank you and encourage you to keep helping equip your fellow citizens. America needs you, Christians need you, I need you. God bless you each. Chris from Kansas City. He said p. s., guys, I need to get back out to mow more grass, at least before the snow hits and I need to catch up on WallBuilders. Oh, my goodness, that was such a good one. Thank you so much, Chris, for sharing with us and to everybody else, thank you for listening. You've been listening to The WallBuilders Show.