Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
Yes, the Chinese were definitely a follow-the-leader, subsume-the-one-into-the-many culture. Which is one reason communism took them over so easily. Such a thing could never have happened in America. That's probably why the Recovery never really did that well in the USA. We value autonomy too much. As you said, they've had to bring in Asians because Americans, by and large, won't go for it.
|
But Western culture in general, and American in particular, have their own issues, some quite severe. Yet if Americans thought their culture were a divine analogue (perhaps some occasionally have) that would be crazy, no? Or as
Igzy says, 'nuts'. Witness Lee, with his insistence on no culture at all, ensured that his would reign unchallenged. And we can see its fruit.
I was reading a story on the Battle of Guadalcanal, specifically the Battle of Edson's Ridge. The commanding officer, Major General Vandegrift, thought the Japanese would attack through the low areas near Henderson Field, and assigned positions of defence accordingly. The subordinate, Lt. Colonel Edson, thought the high ground more defensible, and wanted to dig in there. He and Vandegrift's second-in-command convinced the CO that Edson's men should bivouac and "rest" on the ridge. In actuality Edson was making defensive positions. Turns out the Japanese came that way, and they were able to repulse them. Holding the high ground was invaluable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Edson%27s_Ridge
Such semi-independent, "local" thinking is a hallmark of the Americans at war. The Japanese would never question a superior. Secondly, the Japanese came in human wave assaults, even when it was clear that they were not succeeding they continued to pour men into the meat-grinder. And in Korea ten years later it was similar: the individual didn't matter as much as the Cause. Americans, by contrast, deeply value the individual.
Not that one way is superior to another, but local church "normality" is Asian. Witness Lee talking to Sal Benoit is a great example: Lee can borrow $100K from Sal and the Bostonians for his son's motor home business, but Sal can't see the books. "None of your business". Yet Sal and the Bostonians have to keep sending $$ to Anaheim for books, trainings, donations for the ministry advance, campus building projects etc. Shut up and follow the Cause. To question or challenge is "rebellion".
That's not the way they think in the US. I've written on George Washington's leadership: He gathered his generals in a tent, let them hash it out... do we attack, or do we stop and regroup? Washington had final say, but they all batted the idea around in front of him. Would Lee ever do this? Of course not! That would be a sign of weakness, in his cultural lens.
"You are in the [Chinese] army, now." When Lee wrote in the
RecV footnotes that all local churches should be "absolutely identical, with no differences what soever", we all knew what it meant: absolute, thoughtless conformity with HQ, with no independent, local initiatives of the local assemblies permitted. Anything that stood out would be "ambition", the "gopher" that poked his head out of the hole. The Holy Spirit's ability to nudge you to take the south road out of Jerusalem, and run up to the Ethiopian in a chariot, and baptise him and send him on his way without calling him back to HQ for "training" - gone forever.