Moses—Henry George's inspiration - Religious Foundations of Social Policy

American Journal of Economics and Sociology, The, Dec, 2001 by Aharon H. Shapiro

AHARON H. SHAPIRO (*)

The "Essence" of George's Social Philosophy

IN JUNE, 1878, Henry George delivered his "Moses" lecture to the Young Men's Hebrew Association of San Francisco. His address was later repeated in Scotland, England, and New York. According to Edward J. Rose (1968), the "Moses" Sermon expresses the essence of George's social philosophy. It was delivered while George was in the midst of committing to paper the already well formulated views of his masterwork Progress and Poverty.

George was highly critical of contemporary institutionalized religion. He felt that it subordinated the pressing needs of the here and now to the less relevant concerns of the hereafter. He contended that present day Christianity had strayed from the original social objectives of the religion's founders. George argued that "the Christianity that ignores this social responsibility has really forgotten the teachings of Christ" (George 1887:252). (1)

In contrast, George finds great kinship in the pristine and untainted teachings of the Hebrew codifier, Moses (Rose 1968:54-59; Barker 1955, 248-51). George demonstrates in his "Moses" lecture how the social program of Moses, the emancipator, is consonant with his own philosophy and economics. Like Moses, George had hoped to set free a people whom he considered to be in modern industrial bondage.

This article will attempt to enhance the reader's understanding of how the teachings of the Law-giver, Moses, served as a major inspiration to George's own thinking. We shall find that three aspects of Moses' personality impressed George: Moses the revolutionary against the conventional wisdom, Moses the political reformer, and Moses the social and economic reformer.

Moses, the Revolutionary

WE START WITH George's observation that the Hebrews populated Egypt for perhaps two centuries and should have totally assimilated the views of their taskmasters. Yet, says George, "What is remarkable is the dissimilarity." After all, was not Egypt the dominant civilization of the world "ere Abraham looked upon them?" (George 1878:8)

We might add that even Patriarch Abraham, the first Hebrew, on his visit to Egypt had been repelled by Egyptian immorality. He was compelled to deny that Sarah was his wife. He feared that he would be murdered since it was common practice for Egyptians to abduct the wives of strangers for sexual purposes (Genesis 12:12).

The followers of Moses, however, rebelled against both the chains and the moral values of their taskmasters. In reproach of Egypt's immorality, Moses found it necessary to remind his flock, "After the doings of the land of Egypt in which you dwelled, shall you not do" (Leviticus 18:3).

George sympathizes with Moses' problem in dealing with the masses. After leaving Egypt, the people began to succumb to their former Egyptian influences and "the constant disposition of accustomed ideas to reassert themselves in the

minds of the people" (George 1878:11). The Israelites troubled Moses with their occasional backsliding. They lapsed into a form of Egyptian idolatry with the worship of the golden calf (Exodus 32:10).

Moses gains great respect in the eyes of Henry George for rejecting God's offer to replace the existing Israelites with a new nation composed of Moses and his descendants. This is what George means when he speaks of Moses "subordinating to the good of his people the natural disposition to found a dynasty which in his case would have been so easy" (George 1878:23). Moses declines the Divine offer in favor of preserving the present, albeit sinful, people, and receives George's praise for "his unselfish desire to make humanity better, happier, nobler" (George 1878:23). Nor is Moses discouraged by the whining of a mob that complains "who will give us meat? How we remember the fish that we ate in Egypt at no expense" (Numbers 11:4-5).

Moses led the Israelites to renounce all the conventional mores of Egypt, the idolatry, the witchcraft, and the sexual promiscuity (Leviticus 18:13). Egypt must be rejected as a land identified with disease (Deuteronomy 7:15).

Also repugnant to Moses was the Egyptian ideology that chose to enslave live men in order to build temples and pyramids to honor dead men. Here, George is most perceptive in noting that the Pentateuch of Moses shows almost no explicit concern about life after death (George 1878:13). (2)

George is impressed with Moses' interest in the living compared to Egyptian involvement with the dead. George comments that anyone can locate the lavish tombs of the ancient Pharaohs even in this day. In contrast, Moses arranged for his own discreet burial so that "no man knoweth of his sepulcher unto this day" (George 1878:24). (3) George could have also noted that Moses was buried outside the promised land of Canaan; nor were his remains ever transported to, nor any tomb erected in, Canaan. Again, possibly this was intended to encourage reverence for the living teachings of Moses and not merely the deceased personality, Moses.

George sees Moses as the ultimate crusader who will create a new "social state in which deep degrading poverty should be unknown" (George 1878:16). Does not George identify with Moses who expresses his love for humanity even as he scolds them for their bad conduct? Leviticus 19 lists an inventory of abominations associated with Egypt, yet concludes on a note of compassion for mankind. Moses declares that a major lesson must be learned from the Egyptian experience. One must love even the stranger, "for you were strangers in the land of Egypt" (Leviticus 19:34; also see Exodus 22:20 and 23:9).