Robin Hood misidentified today
The thought of Robin Hood swinging through the trees in Sherwood Forest is a noble concept. This hero of the persecuted is an arbiter of justice. He robbed from the rich and gave to the poor. But the story bears closer examination. Did Robin Hood actually “rob” from the rich to give to the poor? Or does this fictitious hero have another lesson tucked away in his quiver?
Social justice v. charity
Today a growing contingent in this nation believes it is right and somehow just for us to take from those who have plenty. After all, they can afford to part with a few extra dollars to help others. They have more than they need.
Social justice may seem logical and good. But how does it square with biblical principles? Doesn’t the Bible tell us to take care of those who are less fortunate? Of course it does. It’s called charity. Charity means giving to others by your own free will. That is distinctively different from taking what is not yours. In fact, the 10th commandment reads (Exodus 20:17):
You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor.
In light of this commandment, does looking at what someone has and believing we are “entitled” to it breach the 10th commandment? If so, then social justice cannot be a biblical principle. The major problem with social justice is that it means taking from someone what they have. That is covetousness, as compared to charity, which means giving what you have by your own free will. Helping others in need is indeed a virtue. But taking what someone has – even to give to someone else – is not virtuous no matter how we twist and contort it.
The real Robin Hood
The real Robin Hood stands on the Castle Green near Nottingham Castle. Photo: Tom Courtney. Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic License.
Did the noble Robin Hood believe in social justice? If you recall the story, Robin Hood only took from Prince John and those elitists in his group. They oppressed those under their control through unjust taxation. Robin Hood took back what Prince John and his cronies took from the people undeservedly. Then he gave it back to the people to whom it rightfully belonged.
This made Robin Hood noble. The justice he dispensed was much different from what we have twisted it to mean today. If Robin Hood were real and alive today, his band of merry men and women would most likely be called TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party activists. Instead of hiding clandestinely in Sherwood Forest, they would be storming the capitals in DC and their home states. They would demand that the elitists who preside there return their hard-earned money and stop stealing their prosperity.
Who are the Prince Johns of today?
Today’s Prince Johns and his cronies don’t live in castles, but they may live in mansions. And they don’t ride horses through Sherwood Forest, but they do ride in luxurious airplanes paid for with our tax dollars to conferences in places like Copenhagen and South Africa – all in the name of serving the public. They might not wear gold crowns, but they might wear $9,000 purses. Richard the Lionhearted will not arrive from some far off land to restore sanity to our government, but we have voting booths that can dethrone our oppressive elitists who are masquerading as our representatives. November is only a few months away and hopefully our modern-day Robin Hoods and all the merry men and women in this country will be merry again as we take our prosperity back into our own hands and restore sanity to government.
3 Responses to Robin Hood misidentified today
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Since 1980 the size of the American economy has doubled, yet the median income has barely changed at all. Nearly all of this growth has ended up in the hands of the super rich. In 1980 the wealthiest 1% controlled about 10% of all total income. Today, this 1% controls about 40% of all total income. With this new wealth has come massive political power, allowing the super rich to continue to drop what they pay in taxes. This has caused the tax revenue received by the government to drop sharply, resulting in massive debt. These super rich are then using the chaos and fear created by this debt and uncertainty to turn the middle class against itself, union vs non-union, christian vs non-christian and so on. As a result, the super wealthy continue to weld even more power, which they use to pay even less in taxes, so they can have more money and hence more power, all while impoverishing the American middle class.
There are elites, and yes, they weld massive political power, but most of these power brokers and kingmakers are part of massive corporations. These corporations have seized control of the media, and actively use it to keep the middle class in-fighting and frightened. The Tea party is one of these implements of chaos, despite the cries to the contrary. It has simply polarized the middle class, so that average Americans cannot come to a consensus.
If you want a strong prosperous America, start taxing the super wealthy. In the 1950s, a time of unparalleled prosperity and growth in America, the income tax rate on the richest Americans was over 90%. Our state coffers were full, and we were indisputably the greatest and most powerful nation on Earth, and our high tax rate didn’t diminish this, in fact it allowed this prosperity and growth of the middle class to happen.
If you want to continue to beggar the country, and hand over global supremacy to China, by all means, refuse to tax the wealthy. The middle class will continue to struggle and eventually may die, destroying everything America stands for, like the promise of social mobility.
The Tea Party is right in the assertion that currently we are experiencing a state of class warfare in the United States. It is a shame that the Tea Party is fighting for the wrong side, but that’s what billions of dollars worth of corporate propaganda can do.
I couldn’t agree more. There is an entitlement mentarlity that permeats through this land and much like a virus seems to have no cure. We need a change in attitude. We need to start putting others first. Too many times we are willing to stop entitlements for others but cling to our own. We need to wind down and eventually stop all welfare including corporate and farm. We need men to be men and care and provide for their families and be fathers and husbands according to biblical mandates. You go Rose Ann because yours ideas are the cure for this virus and we need to implement these ideas in our local, state and federal government.
Cal Wortman
Avenel, NJ
The tale of Robin Hood came from before the industrial revolution. There were no real entrepreneurs in those times, the feudal system did not allow for this. Serfs were bound to the land as slaves and the few craftsmen were bound to local lords. With the coming of industrialization production moved towards towns, since building a single factory with all your laborers is less expensive and easier to organize than having decentralized machinery laying about the country-side.
There, the power fell from the aristocracy into the hands of the merchants, the bourgeoisie. Following that were the bourgeois revolutions (starting with the American Revolution). These were of little benefit to the common folk and only served to reduce the tax burden on the bourgeoisie.
Robin Hood robbed the nobles because they had more than they deserved. Deserving comes from labor, and nobles did none. Neither does the bourgeoisie.
Taxation, however, is a poor solution because it relies on currency, which is but a tool by the rich to enslave the laborers. Today, we are held hostage by the upper class. They did not build the factories, they did not design the machines, and yet they reap the profits while the proletariat suffers. Just because they had the money to begin with. This is made worse because the working class has been delegated to undeveloped and developing nations. Americans do not see the class struggle anymore. They do not see the conditions in which their clothes are made. We are content to be in the middle class – as we should be!- and fail to see the misery of others caused by the exploitation of the rich.