Ok. where were we last time so many weeks ago. Discussing various types of governments, and urning back the

calendar to look a what socialism is and who invented it.

First of all socialism is not a form of government. You have basically just three or four types of government.

Because many forms have ben in place for hundred or even thousands of years. The main and oldest form is

isa monarchy, which often was a theocratic monarchy, with a king/high priest in charge. An excellent example would

be Egypt. Of course there were many others around that time, and even earlier but for simplicity lets use Egypt as

our example. To be fair of course there were other examples like the Hittites, Persia, several Meso-American

civilizations and naturally Asian. In this example there was a single leader who was a combination of a civic

governor and religious leader, who would have appointed others to help with duties like tax collecting, Tax collecting

was in many forms, in some cases a month of labor might be assessed, perhaps working on civic projects like

public buildings. Another tax was likely to be grain or other food staples, to feed or pay the laborers who were

working on public projects, while a portion of the grain would be stored away in case of drought or flood, the food

would be used to feed the populace if the crops failed or were ruined. This ws the duty of the government of the


This was socialism. The government was responsible for the populace as a whole, not merely the big-wigs.

All of the people contributed for the good of everyone. Taxes of grain were paid by the farmers and the others who

did not farm pain in labor (to be fair, those able to do so might hire someone else to do the actual labor. However it

was done, the tax was paid and everyone benefitted.

These were not, in any way or by any definition, Socialist governments. They would be either Monarchies or

Theocracies. One person was in charge, though there might be delegated or other hereditary positions, but one

person was in charge. They might be kind or and least not despotic awards their people. They usually lead the Army

which incidentally was much of the time and in many places, such a Greece, the duty of all male citizens to join the

fight whenever needed.

Now lets fly forward to the much later BC’s and look at some of the Kings and cults in the Holy Land. First of all,

the first King was Saul, followed by David whose som was Solomon and so on and so forth. Score later we come to

‘the late BC early CE or AD period. We had Herod the Great. Herod liked to think big, and he did things like rebuild

the Temple. Naturally he had to Tax there populace which he did. He also taxed outsiders, much like Solomon was

thought to have done in terms of trade with the Egyptians, among others, Herod, though, got mixed up with the

Romans and became essentially a vassal. When He died Herod Antipas, his son got part of the Kingdom (Judah, I

. believe) and his brothers helped carve top the rest. Of course in Israel, the Southern Kingdom we had a mixed

governing power. The Romans basically were the heavies and put the screws to the tax collectors. Meanwhile, the

Priests of the Temple were expected to keep the people happu=y or at lest not rebellious via the faith, as well as a

civil authority in Jerusalem, on which sat the priests and elders (aka the wealthy) if Jerusalem. But, not everyone

was happy and a cult (one of many) formed and built a monastery out by the Dead Sea, called Qumran. It is thought

that the Dead Sea Scrolls were hidden in the caves around the Dead Sea when the Romans got a little annoyed and

sent a few legions to pretty much eradicate the somewhat irritating people of what we know as the Holy Land in 70


Now the interesting thing about the Qumran settlement is that most scholars think is was a sort of monastic cult

that may have copied the scrolls of the Torah, and thus kept the purity of the Word. But if that is the case, and those

scholars are correct, Qumran may well have been a communist society’

Thats right. Communist (gasp!) You see, if they are right they may have shared everything communally. Thus

they would be a communist society! How about that! But not a socialist society. Because their numbers and

membership would have been controlled, possibly closed or very difficult to get into. Only the members

would benefit from anything the community did or did not do. Most likely there was one person or a

group in charge, and again likely the members were essentially equals. Work and food were shared and so on.

Now that we have discussed those types of socialist societies we will next go on to some other forms of

government. Some good, many bad.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s