“God helps those who help themselves.” After all, it’s in the bible, right?
Wrong.
It is nowhere to be found in the bible. If you disagree, please feel free to consult the text or your favorite bible sources and experts and come back to me.
But just because that isn’t in the bible, does not mean that we are not called to the task of helping those who help themselves. In fact, it is one of the two main callings, one of the two main parts, of the Revolution 2.0 belief set
Normally we leave these two rules, or teachings if you will, for the end of our twice-a-week time together, but today it is appropriate to go directly there. The two main tenets of what we believe at Revolution 2.0 are:
- Personal Responsibility; practice it, teach it and
- Be Your Brother’s Keeper.
Clearly, point 2, being our brothers and sisters keeper, is our focus right now. But don’t forget point 1, the personal responsibility part, because part of point 1, personal responsibility, is to practice point 2, being our brother’s keeper. These two principles work hand-in-hand.
As we look at our responsibility, our privilege, of helping others, let’s not forget the “who help themselves” part. They, the people we can help, also have the twin responsibilities of taking personal responsibility themselves, and in turn, of helping others. The phrase “who help themselves” can be seen as part of the others taking responsibility. Said differently, perhaps more simply, we are responsible for meeting our obligations, and we are called to help others. Those others are are responsible for meeting their obligations and, in turn helping still others. When two those simple things happen, things work.
What do we do when those others do not help themselves? Do we still have that Brother’s Keeper obligation? Yes. And we need to do some kind of triage. Triage is necessary because all resources, ours, the government’s, all resources, are limited. And all needs are unlimited. This clearly means that we must prioritize. We must prioritize our personal resources, and when we vote and otherwise engage in the political process, we must work to prioritize the public’s, our government’s, resources. Remember: our government has no resources–not a dime, nothing–that does not come from taxpayers–from us–by taxation. I want this point to come through so very clearly; we have our own personal resources, and the government has only the resources that it gathers from the people–us. When we talk about resources that are used to address needs, all resources come from people, from individuals–us. (No, this is not the time to debate the false claim that “corporations are not people.” But I do invite the discussion.)
Given that all resources come from people, the rules for triage, for prioritizing resources, in this case the resources needed to help others, are the same for government and individuals. Our government has more resources than we do, but it is only the size of the resources that is different. The rules should be the same.
Medical triage originated in World War I. Wounded soldiers were classified into one of three groups:
- Those who could be expected to live without medical care,
- Those who would likely die even with care, and
- Those who could survive if they received care.
So, let’s look at how this definition can guide today’s discussion.
Brother’s Keeper Triage:
- Those who do not need help.
- Those who are beyond any reasonable help. Steeped in being angry victims. Blaming others and taking no responsibility. Demanding and not producing, taking and not giving. N. B. There are very few of these irredeemable people. Some, yes, but not many.
- Everybody else. Including you and me.
The primary reason that category 2 above, Those beyond any reasonable help, in the Brother’s Keeper triage, may seem much larger than it is–it may appear to be huge and growing–is that 99% of the people in this category, this level of triage, have been taught to think the way they do. What have they been taught? Exactly what we said above. The rightness of being victims, the correctness of blaming others and the necessity of taking instead of giving. We must teach them how things really work if they want to succeed. And get them to believe. Believe. Get them to believe that they can help themselves. Once they believe, and oh-so-many will believe if we encourage them, teaching them how is just logistics.
Let’s do this for ourselves and others together. Remember, part of our personal responsibility is to help others.
Recommended links that will add to today’s discussion: “Give a man a fish…”
Please do contact me about this or anything. Respond in my Revolution 2.0 blog, email me at will@revolution2-0.org. And I’m easy to find on iTunes, Google Play and the usual Bat Channels, including Twitter and Facebook.
It is time for our usual parting thought. For us at Revolution 2.0, it is not only change your thinking, change your life. It is change your thinking, change your actions, change the world. And if you can do it in love and enjoy the people around you at the same time, all the better. Remember: Knowledge by itself is the booby prize.
And if we, you and I, don’t do something, then the others who are doing something, will continue to run the show.
Will Luden, writing to you from my home office at 7,200’ in Colorado Springs.
The core, driving principles at Revolution 2.0, are:
1. Personal Responsibility. Take it, teach it.
2. Be Your Brother’s Keeper. Taking care of our brothers and sisters.
If we apply those two core principles simultaneously, we will inevitably be on the right path.
- Ending Gun Violence: Punish The Criminals (EP. 405) - July 15, 2022
- How To Get Good Government: The Formula (EP. 404) - July 1, 2022
- The Candy Bomber Lives: Is It You? (EP. 403) - June 24, 2022
6 Responses
Hello revolution2-0.org administrator, Thanks for the informative post!
Hi revolution2-0.org administrator, You always provide in-depth analysis and understanding.
Hi revolution2-0.org administrator, Thanks for the well-presented post!
Hi revolution2-0.org admin, Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
I don’t think the title of your article matches the content lol. Just kidding, mainly because I had some doubts after reading the article.
Can you be more specific about the content of your article? After reading it, I still have some doubts. Hope you can help me.