Merrily we sail along….

The yacht Academia

From PJ Media, writer Philip Carl Salzman: “During the 1960s and 1970s, Marxism and feminism redefined North American society as a hierarchy of oppression, with white, patriarchal capitalists at the top, and poor lesbians of color at the bottom. All citizens were redefined as members of racial, economic, gender, sexual, and ethnic classes, with people of white oppressing people of color, males oppressing females, rich oppressing poor, heterosexuals oppressing LGBTQ++, Christians and Jews oppressing Muslims, and so on. This approach is called social justice theory.

”According to social justice theory, ideas such as ‘merit’ and ‘achievement’ are male, white supremacist ideas, used to ensure the unfair dominance of white men. Social justice requires equal category representation. It appears from polls that Americans increasingly oppose social justice racial and gender preferences. Note that while social justice advocates are pushing for representation on the basis of races, gender, sexuality, and ethnicity, they have no concern with the representation of public opinion. In fact, the one kind of diversity that they oppose is diversity of opinion. Only social justice views are acceptable; contrary views are vilified as ‘hate speech’.” Who would benefit from the ideology that denigrates merit and achievement? Losers, that’s who. Social justice = losers rule.

Social justice has one simple explanation for differing results among gender, racial, and other categories of people: discrimination. ‘Losers rule’ teachers, professors, and administrators who dominate our schools and universities do not stop with preferred ‘equity, diversity, and inclusion’ admissions and hiring. Rather, they aim to discredit Western Civilization and American and Canadian society because they were founded and built by white men. The great literary and philosophical works of Western Civilization are no longer read because they are the creations of ‘dead white men.’ It is offensive to ‘losers rule’ advocates, particularly feminists, that white men invented Western culture, science, and technology. The Constitution of the United States is now rejected by such professors because it is the work of slaveholders.

“Slavery in the United States is a trump card of social justice theorists, who frame it as the original sin of America which taints everything else. What they neglect is that slavery was the basis of ancient civilization, and a worldwide historical phenomenon; was a major institution in ancient Greece and in Rome; was a major social fact in Africa, where African slave raiders and traders, in addition to keeping slaves for local use, provided the slaves for the North Atlantic slave trade; in the Middle East where Muslims slavers raided Africa for over a thousand years, and where the Islamic State in the 21st century, up to 2018, enslaved ‘infidels,’ turning the females into sex slaves; in North Africa, where Muslim slave raiders sailed north as far as Ireland to capture tens of thousands of white Europeans to be sold into slavery; while in India ‘untouchable’ quasi-slaves were half of the population; and in Russia serfs performed the same functions.

One of history’s most inconvenient facts is, it was white men in Europe who made slavery redundant by inventing science, modern agriculture, and the industrial revolution, raising productivity through the work of machines, so that slave labor was no longer desirable.

Social justice subjectivity and advocacy have replaced the search for reality and truth in schools and universities. Objectivity is viewed as a tool that straight white men use to suppress females, people of color, and those of various sexualities. Today, in universities, identity is the most important ‘reality,’ and everyone has their ‘own truth.’ If you argue along with science that men and women are biologically different, you are rejected as sexist. If you argue along with science that men cannot be women and women cannot be men, you are rejected as a transphobe. If you argue that there is discrimination in favor of, not against females, you are rejected as a sexist. Research and evidence on such matters are suppressed. There is not just peer pressure against views contrary to losers rule fantasies, but these views are actively suppressed by administrators, the many equity, diversity, and inclusion” officers, whose job is to suppress them.”

“Once equality of opportunity, merit, and competition are denounced as white male tricks to maintain supremacy, or as toxic masculinity, it is only logical to reject capitalism and differential distribution of assets, or inequality, and to advocate for socialism.” As the yacht Academia blithely sails on in the flood of irrationality and the formation of a plethora of unenforceable “rights”, it will inevitably become shipwrecked when the money dries up. As college degrees become increasingly worthless, as alternatives to campuses become more popular, as (hopefully) wealthy alumni—who, sad to say are still mostly white men who are able to afford endowing colleges because they embraced those archaic concepts of merit and achievement—wise up and shift their tax deductible giving elsewhere, the rats will begin deserting the yacht, shedding their asbestos robes as they scramble.

“Like a dog that returns to his vomit is a fool who repeats his folly.” Proverbs 26:11.

12 Obsolete manly things….

check out the original at the Babylon Bee

Let’s face facts. The “manliness” you hear old people talking about is outdated and tired. It’s time to move on from the prehistoric concepts of masculinity and onto the new way to be male. Here are 12 things considered “manly” that are now woefully obsolete. Along with each, we’ve proposed a better, more up-to-date alternative. 

Any idea that has been around for more than thirty years is old hat. Chivalry, if it were a hat, would be one of those stupid ruffly hats they wore in old French paintings. It is an archaic practice that assumes women can’t accomplish basic tasks such as opening doors, pull seats out from tables, and walk without holding onto some man’s arm. It’s time to retire this tired, sexist trope that parades around pretending to be a form of respect and admit women have no need for male door charity.

INSTEAD: Get a Sex Change and Beat the Tar Out of Women in MMA
True respect for women requires drastic, body-altering measures. Instead of opening doors for women, consider getting a sex-change and opening up wounds on women’s skulls in the octagon. Instead of pulling out chairs for women, pull a woman’s arm out of its socket. If you want women to know you consider them equals, quit body-shaming and start body slamming.

OBSOLETE MANLY THING #2: Helping Old Ladies
The ageist concept of helping old ladies cross the street, carry groceries or use Skype has been an oppressive thorn in the side of the elderly for centuries. Men can’t seem to find anyone who they think doesn’t need their help, even people who have nearly 100 years of experience at doing things. That’s just arrogant.

INSTEAD: Dox Some Teenagers
A true man finds kids with differing political views online and does everything within their power to destroy their pathetic little lives. See a kid in a MAGA hat smirking on YouTube? It’s time to man-up and sic the entire internet on that impish little twirp. Find their home address, phone number, high school, Facebook page, and any other personal information then immediately make it public. The child will be bombarded with death threats, harassment, and maybe even physical violence, but you will be overwhelmed with a true sense of accomplishment.

OBSOLETE MANLY THING #3: Fixing Things Around the House
It’s common knowledge that things don’t break anymore. I mean, come on. It’s 2019, people. Fences last forever, plumbing never leaks, and tools are just overpriced symbols useful only for testosterone-signaling. Besides, home ownership in itself is patriarchal. A true man rents a pastel-yellow townhouse in a suburb with all maintenance included in the rent. Men who make their own repairs are stealing work from the lower class because they hate poor people and, even worse, are racist against migrants.

INSTEAD: Learn Interior Decorating
A real man learns how to tie a room together by picking the right throw pillows, shopping for shabby chic antiques, and repurposing old furniture using chalk paint and sandpaper.

What purpose could a grill have that a microwave cannot accomplish? The grill is a tool for desperate males to labor over in an attempt to assert their relevance in a culture long past the cave-times of cooking with actual fire. Besides, eating animals is murder. Do you want to be a real man? Eat only kale.

INSTEAD: Grill Your Stupid Face
If you are a male, you probably have a stupid face. If you want to grill something, grill that. For bonus points, grill your face until your lips fuse together so that you’ll stop all the obnoxious mansplaining too. That’s true manliness.

OBSOLETE MANLY THING #5: Fighting and Self Defense 
Hey macho man, ever heard of the cops? You don’t need to learn to defend yourself, and the very idea that you need to defend anyone else is elitist, sexist, racist hogwash. True men don’t worry about defense; they worry about offense. If you aren’t actively finding things to be offended by, you don’t need to defend yourself; you need to check your self.

INSTEAD: Roundhouse Kick Pro-Life Women
If you must exert physical dominance and retain your man card, kick a woman who is so stupid she doesn’t even want an abortion. That’ll teach her. Even better if she is pregnant, then you can say it was two against one.

It’s time to retire meaningless terms like “father” and “dad”. While toxic masculinity has been on the rise, thankfully, fatherhood has been on the decline. You take the good with the bad. It’s been scientifically proven that children are best raised by government agents or lesbians. Dads aren’t just optional, they’re a problem. It’s time to stop messing up kids by forcing them to call some inconsequential sperm donor “daddy.”

INSTEAD: Enjoy Some Casual Abortion
Instead of burdening children with your male insecurity and need for control, kill them legally in clinics across the country. Real men sleep with as many women as possible without any intention to start a family because it is well known that families are bad for the environment. Suppressing your sexuality is the worst thing you can do as a male and modern abortion laws give men the opportunity to do pretty much the only thing they are good for and that’s impregnating women so they can discover the wonderful, life-changing experience of having an abortion.

OBSOLETE MANLY THING #7: Disciplining Children
Do you discipline your child? Please say yes so I can immediately call CPS on you. What is this, the dark ages?

INSTEAD: Dress Your Children in Drag and Put Them On TV
Is your child showing signs that they may not be your stereotypical male or female? Does your son show some interest in feminine things, such as wearing a bracelet here and there or the color pink? Immediately get that kid some hormone blockers, some lingerie, and get them dancing in a gay strip club. There is no time to lose because if you do not embrace your child’s curiosity now, he or she could move on and become another cisgendered breeder. Who needs more of those? Everybody knows that there is no better time in your life to lock into your sexuality than around 8 to 10 years old. 

OBSOLETE MANLY THING #8: Cigar smoking
Not only is smoking one of the main sins against God (source: the 10 commandments), secondhand smoke literally murders billions of people every minute. One puff of a cigar and people start dropping like flies. Smoking is for genocidal maniacs with a big ego and no compassion.

INSTEAD: Start Bra Burning and Become a Feminist
Women don’t need your help holding their purse, they need you to hold up some picket signs and strain your vocal cords shouting down the patriarchy. Women know that a man parading around at a women’s march, especially one involving nude female protesters, is a trustworthy, selfless ally.

OBSOLETE MANLY THING #9: Earning your living
There is no more misguided philosophy than the tired cliche of pulling yourself up by your bootstraps and trying to earn a living. There was a time when these sort of cute, antiquated notions were useful, but now there are tons of rich people who have already taken all the money which means trying to achieve financial success is completely futile.

INSTEAD: Demand a Living from the Government
A true go-getter goes and gets money from the government. Robots are taking all the jobs anyway. It’s time the government started sending everyone free money. It takes a real man to demand free money and to resist the capitalist lie of hard work.

OBSOLETE MANLY THING #10: Opening Pickle Jars
Every man wants to be the pickle hero. But in this day and age, if a woman can’t twist the lid off of a jar of pickles, she can— and should— simply smash the jar against a wall for being so oppressive. Why should a man step in and ally himself with a jar that wasn’t willing to respect women? That’s not masculine. That’s alt-right-pickle-adjacent behavior at best. 

INSTEAD: Open Borders
Find a border and tear it down. Prove your hate for walls by destroying any wall you see. Find a map and white-out any border lines. Don’t waste another minute trying to open a jar when there are borders everywhere oppressing basically everyone.

The idea that any vehicles are needed besides Uber is pure American greed. An ATV is nothing more than a toxic-masculinity bike that destroys the environment. 

INSTEAD: Contracting STDs
Throw off the shackles of monogamy and sleep with as many women as possible. Men collect many things such as stamps, car parts, oil cans, and beer bottles. But there is no more truly manly joy than a thriving and growing collection of STDs.

Parties of any kind, where males are involved, are unsafe. The drinks are drugged, there are beer pong balls flying everywhere, and someone is definitely going to get punched. These barbaric gatherings should have been outlawed a long time ago.

INSTEAD: Join the Communist Party
Let’s just get right down to it: Communism. If men would all just become gender-neutral communists, all of the other problems on Earth would sort themselves out. Sadly, real gender-neutral feminist communism has never been tried.

The inverse relationship between knowledge and arrogance.

failed New Guinea discussion

The young, in the stages of development prior to maturity, in complex and specialized i.e. civilized societies like ours, seem to suffer no lack of arrogance. The same cannot be said for their knowledge, especially that of a historical perspective. The more mature they get, if they acquire more knowledge, the less arrogant they tend to be. There is clearly an inverse relationship between knowledge and arrogance. You may dispute this point by examples of “mature” adults who appear to have both knowledge and arrogance in abundance, such as dominant media pundits and college faculty. I would counter by saying, what appears to be knowledge is actually opinion, while agreeing with the arrogance part. While opinions can be the product of knowledge, most dominant media and college campuses are halls of mirrors, or echo chambers, where opinions are popularity rather than knowledge driven.

I have been reading Guns, Germs and Steel: The fates of human societies, by Jared Diamond. He lived with New Guinea tribes for many years and the book is fascinating in its surveying of history, geography, biology, food production and the effects of those factors on human societies. But what stimulated me to start this post is the following passage: “One reason why the organization of human government tends to change from that of a tribe to that of a chiefdom in societies with more than a few hundred members is that the difficult issue of conflict resolution between strangers becomes increasingly acute in larger groups. A fact further diffusing potential problems of conflict resolution in tribes is that almost everyone is related to everyone else, by blood or marriage or both. Those ties of relationships binding all tribal members make police, laws, and other conflict-resolving institutions of larger societies unnecessary, since any two villagers getting into an argument will share many kin, who apply pressure on them to keep it from becoming violent. In traditional New Guinea society, if a New Guinean happened to encounter an unfamiliar New Guinean while both were away from their respective villages, the two engaged in a long discussion of their relatives, in an attempt to establish some relationship and hence some reason why the two should not attempt to kill each other.

The book is very long, but this tiny passage, especially the part I bolded, indicates a basic truth about human nature which we, with all our written rules and laws, effective policing and the advantages that living in the most powerful nation in history, blithely ignore or deride. In the absence of family and tribal ties or law enforcement, people are generally either vulnerable to others, or aggressive to others. Once there is a functioning government with a monopoly of force, it can be used to promote happiness, by maintaining public order and curbing violence. This is potentially a big and underappreciated advantage of centralized societies over noncentralized ones. “Anthropologists formerly idealized band and tribal societies as gentle and nonviolent, because visiting anthropologists observed no murder in a band of 25 people in the course of a three-year study. Of course they didn’t: it’s easy to calculate that a band of a dozen adults and a dozen children, subject to the inevitable deaths occurring anyway for the usual reasons other than murder, could not perpetuate itself if in addition one of its dozen adults murdered another adult every three years. Much more extensive long-term information about band and tribal societies reveals that murder is a leading cause of death.”

People who were born into, or came to live in at a very young age, a civilized western society have little emotional appreciation of living under a constant threat of violence or a tyrant. (An exception might be those who live in violent, thinly policed neighborhoods). That sense of security, compounded by the lack of knowledge and perspective, breeds arrogance. Arrogance breeds a proliferation of claims to rights, which get ever more extreme and demanding. The ultimate expression of arrogance being inversely related to knowledge is the cry, “I have a right to feel safe!” Safe from what? Dissenting opinions? Microaggressions? People of a different skin pigmentation? Responsibilities? No, you don’t have a right to feel safe. No one ever has. That right cannot be claimed, because it cannot be enforced, except by suppressing anything that anyone feels unsafe about. Is that what you want?


Today I installed the Swiftkey virtual keyboard on my android phone. One of the ways I could customize the keyboard was by selecting either the QWERTY or AZERTY layouts (name for the first six keys in the top row). I thought, “I really prefer the AZERTY layout, because of the way I scan and type, but since every physical keyboard I have seen is QWERTY, there must be a good reason for that.” No, not anymore. Here is an excerpt from a book I am reading:

Still another factor is compatibility with vested interests. This book, like probably every other typed document you have ever read, was typed with a QWERTY keyboard, named for the left-most six letters in its upper row. Unbelievable as it may now sound, that keyboard layout was designed in 1873 as a feat of anti-engineering. It employs a whole series of perverse tricks designed to force typists to type as slowly as possible, such as scattering the commonest letters over all keyboard rows and concentrating them on the left side (where right-handed people have to use their weaker hand). The reason behind all of those seemingly counterproductive features is that the typewriters of 1873 jammed if adjacent keys were struck in quick succession, so that manufacturers had to slow down typists. When improvements in typewriters eliminated the problem of jamming, trials in 1932 with an efficiently laid-out keyboard showed that it would let us double our typing speed and reduce our typing effort by 95 percent. But QWERTY keyboards were solidly entrenched by then. The vested interests of hundreds of millions of QWERTY typists, typing teachers, typewriter and computer salespeople, and manufacturers have crushed all moves toward keyboard efficiency for over 60 years.”

Don’t we feel stupid?

The best cure for P.T.S.D.

What do I know about Post Traumatic Stress Disorder? Quite a lot, but not from the perspective of a sufferer, though PTSD is a subtle beast and how do I know that it is not a root cause of some of my more irritating behaviors? I don’t know, and what’s more, it doesn’t matter. I can, and so can you, modify my behavior by training; we all believe in the power of training our body to do things that previously we could not. In like manner we can train our mind. Lest you are tempted to think, “you aren’t suffering, how can you be so cavalier about training my mind not to suffer?” More to the point, I counter with, “who best to teach another fat person to be slim, the person who remains fat, or the former fat person who is now slim?”

I was an infantry soldier in Vietnam, and was transferred to the medical corps when it was discovered that my college degree was psychology (pretty much worthless, but only I knew that). For 10 months I suffered with, counseled and evaluated the mental fitness (for combat) of the most extreme cases of “combat fatigue”, what we call today ptsd. That term was unknown back in 1969. They were still calling it “shell shock.” My predecessor in this job, more educated in psychology than I was, became drug addicted and shell shocked himself over the stress, and not just of who he was dealing with. I quickly discovered that there were some among my patients who had a very direct way of making their displeasure known, if they didn’t agree with my certifying their mental fitness for return to their units (everyone who I saw wanted out of combat, understandably so). At night, sometimes even in daylight, they would come hunting, with the express purpose of shooting me. Given that everyone was armed, even the quasi medical personnel like me–where we were attacks were frequent–“blowing me away” would not have been difficult. Other than changing my sleeping quarters randomly, posting lookouts and being very alert, there wasn’t much I could do.

I didn’t know it at the time, but I was training my mind to accept the realities of my situation and let go of worrying about the “what-ifs”, controlling what I could and deciding to endure what I had to. Deciding was the important point. Perhaps that cast of mind was responsible for my lack of ptsd. I don’t know. But if you are willing to believe you can train your mind, please read on.

This Charles Spurgeon meditation is the best idea I have ever seen for curing post traumatic stress disorder, which is really reliving an unpleasant memory over and over. As Spurgeon says, such memories “may be trained.”

This I recall to my mind, therefore have I hope.” Lamentations 3:21

Memory is frequently the bond slave of despondency. Despairing minds call to remembrance every dark foreboding in the past, and dilate upon every gloomy feature in the present; thus memory, clothed in sackcloth, presents to the mind a cup of mingled gall and wormwood. There is, however, no necessity for this. Wisdom can readily transform memory into an angel of comfort. That same recollection which in its left hand brings so many gloomy omens, may be trained to bear in its right a wealth of hopeful signs. She need not wear a crown of iron, she may encircle her brow with a fillet of gold, all spangled with stars. Thus it was in Jeremiah’s experience: in the previous verse memory had brought him to deep humiliation of soul: “My soul hath them still in remembrance, and is humbled in me;” and now this same memory restored him to life and comfort. “This I recall to my mind, therefore have I hope.” Like a two-edged sword, his memory first killed his pride with one edge, and then slew his despair with the other. As a general principle, if we would exercise our memories more wisely, we might, in our very darkest distress, strike a match which would instantaneously kindle the lamp of comfort. There is no need for God to create a new thing upon the earth in order to restore believers to joy; if they would prayerfully rake the ashes of the past, they would find light for the present; and if they would turn to the book of truth and the throne of grace, their candle would soon shine as aforetime. Be it ours to remember the lovingkindness of the Lord, and to rehearse his deeds of grace. Let us open the volume of recollection which is so richly illuminated with memorials of mercy, and we shall soon be happy. Thus memory may be, as Coleridge calls it, “the bosom-spring of joy,” and when the Divine Comforter bends it to his service, it may be chief among earthly comforters.

The greatest enemy of peace of mind is resistance to believing it is possible for you.

The character and reality of prayer.

I just finished a post about George Mueller (born 1805). Two meditations by Charles Spurgeon (born 1834) eloquently encompass principles of Mueller’s prayer life.

“Blessed be God, which hath not turned away my prayer.”
Psalm 66:20

In looking back upon the character of our prayers, if we do it honestly, we shall be filled with wonder that God has ever answered them. There may be some who think their prayers worthy of acceptance—as the Pharisee did; but the true Christian, in a more enlightened retrospect, weeps over his prayers, and if he could retrace his steps he would desire to pray more earnestly. Remember, Christian, how cold thy prayers have been. When in thy closet thou shouldst have wrestled as Jacob did; but instead thereof, thy petitions have been faint and few—far removed from that humble, believing, persevering faith, which cries, “I will not let thee go except thou bless me.” Yet, wonderful to say, God has heard these cold prayers of thine, and not only heard, but answered them. Reflect also, how infrequent have been thy prayers, unless thou hast been in trouble, and then thou hast gone often to the mercy-seat: but when deliverance has come, where has been thy constant supplication? Yet, notwithstanding thou hast ceased to pray as once thou didst, God has not ceased to bless. When thou hast neglected the mercy-seat, God has not deserted it, but the bright light of the Shekinah has always been visible between the wings of the cherubim. Oh! it is marvellous that the Lord should regard those intermittent spasms of importunity which come and go with our necessities. What a God is he thus to hear the prayers of those who come to him when they have pressing wants, but neglect him when they have received a mercy; who approach him when they are forced to come, but who almost forget to address him when mercies are plentiful and sorrows are few. Let his gracious kindness in hearing such prayers touch our hearts, so that we may henceforth be found “Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit.”

He led them forth by the right way.”
Psalm 107:7                                                                                         Today my spirit has no hopes, but many fears; no joys, but much distress. Is this part of God’s plan with me? Can this be the way in which God would bring me to heaven? Yes, it is even so. The eclipse of your faith, the darkness of your mind, the fainting of your hope, all these things are but parts of God’s method of making you ripe for the great inheritance upon which you shall soon enter. These trials are for the testing and strengthening of your faith—they are waves that wash you further upon the rock—they are winds which waft your ship the more swiftly towards the desired haven. According to David’s words, so it might be said of you, “So he bringeth them to their desired haven.” By honor and dishonor, by evil report and by good report, by plenty and by poverty, by joy and by distress, by persecution and by peace, by all these things is the life of your souls maintained, and by each of these are you helped on your way. Oh, think not, believer, that your sorrows are out of God’s plan; they are necessary parts of it. “We must, through much tribulation, enter the kingdom.” Learn, then, even to “count it all joy when ye fall into diverse temptations.”

Do I have the right to disagree with you?

This is my favorite second question when deciding whether or not to debate with someone. My first question is, do you believe that there is objective truth, and if so, an opinion based on truth is more valid than an opinion not based on truth? If you get a negative answer to either part of that question, you can explore that question and their answer more deeply, or walk away and spare yourself considerable frustration. Most people, when confronted with such questions this directly, will agree with both parts of the question, but they might also believe that their opinion is based on truth and that those who disagree are stupid, evil, ignorant or liars. My second question, the title, will get at this attitude indirectly, since most people are not willing to call you to your face stupid, evil, ignorant or a liar. How many people, including the most smug, self righteous, or close minded, would say you have no right to disagree (even if they believe that)?

Now you can hope for a rational discussion or debate, until you “hit a nerve”, “wound a sacred cow”, or “touch the third rail” of their beliefs. Love those metaphors! At that point, their demeanor will generally change, and rationality will fly away, usually replaced by anger and accusations. Keep cool, suppress the instinct to defend yourself or counterattack. Just listen, say nothing until they have vented. A useful question to ask at this point is, ” and what else?” That may draw the rest of their issues out. Am I too optimistic that my opposition will be willing to engage? Sometimes they will sometimes they won’t. I personally don’t have a vested interest in being right, only getting to the truth. There is no shame in saying, “I am wrong”, or “I don’t know.” However, I never try to engage via social media of any kind, or text messaging, or email. Those media of communication are not favorable to rationality or in depth debate.

I don’t get much disagreement in my verbal interactions, and only a little in blog comments, but I used to, before I mastered the ideas above. Now to the most important point. Techniques will make you seem smart, and might score enough points to win the debate, but techniques will never reach the other person’s heart. Maybe nothing will, but this is for sure: The starting point of a worthy debate is searching your own heart, seeing clearly inward before you can see clearly outward. The Lord said, “Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,’ when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take out the speck that is in your brother’s eye.” Luke 6:41-42.

The E.U.’s imperialist ambition. Allies in name only.

From TheFederalist, May 23, 2019: Dr. Yoram Hazony, the philosopher and author of the conservative bestseller, “The Virtue of Nationalism,” says, a “future conflict between the EU and United States is almost inevitable. The EU is already a German-dominated empire, he said, but one that has cleverly managed to toss the continent’s entire security burden to American taxpayers, even when it has spent a record amount of 23 billion Euros on welfare for refugees.

“Because American policymakers and taxpayers, either due to misguided optimism, delusion, or naivete, do not see what the EU is slowly morphing into, Germany can carry on the coercive imperium, but without the burden of paying for it and providing all the manpower. Hazony noted this is unsustainable. As the EU consolidates, and U.S. power and control over the EU declines, the EU will inevitably chart its own path, and side with U.S. adversaries.

“With regards to the EU, and other threats, the changes in the United States are structural as well. ‘It turns out that President Trump is more reliable for conservatives than the Bushes or John Major,’ Hazony said. ‘You don’t have to agree with everything he says. But on the big things, we’ve learned that Trump is willing to stand up to China and the European Union, which is much more than can be said of previous conservative leaders. And he’s willing to aggressively safeguard the religious traditions of his nation in the face of a no-holds-barred onslaught by progressives. These are things we haven’t seen before.” There’s hope. While it is easy to imagine Trump as an aberration, he is probably not, as the global direction returns to Westphalian norms of nation-states, as opposed to a transnational globalism, is evident from Brasilia to Brighton, Mumbai to Melbourne.” The United States always seems to lag in awareness of real threats. Perhaps that’s because we trust too much in our power, though in the case of faux allies (former allies—when they needed us) like the EU, it’s because our self styled elites have a vested interest in continuing to pretend they are still allies and not competitors.

“There will obviously be a liberal backlash,” Hazony said. “The control of the political culture by the liberal establishment is deeply entrenched, and it will take time to restore a real two-party democracy in which conservatives have legitimate place in the public sphere.” Nowhere will it be more visible than the capitals of conservative countries, with heavily funded liberal groups and losing electorates engaging in “resistance,” whether in Europe or the United States. But the institutional and financial support for conservative rethinking and revival is coming, even when the movement in this direction is still terribly slow.” We can see this happening all over.

”As predicted, it will lead to a clash of ideas between one side that believes in borders and nation-states (which doesn’t prevent cooperation between different nations), and the other side believes in an ever-consolidating, borderless liberal march, destroying every single nation and its individual character. ‘Independent nations cannot co-exist with a liberal imperialism that is unwilling to recognize the legitimacy of national independence and national borders,’ Hazony noted.” I read some Bible passages this morning that spoke to me about borders and the blessing of (some) immigrants. It was Solomon’s prayer, after moving the tables of the Ten Commandments into the just completed temple of the Lord. While he is praying specifically about the kingdom of Israel and not the United States, here’s what I believe is applicable: use of the word “foreigner” legitimizes the concept of borders, and Solomon is asking the Lord to bless the prayers of an immigrant in the same way as he asked the Lord to bless the prayers of his own children. This prayer is not for foreigners in general, but only for those who came to Israel because they loved the Lord and wanted to live under His protection. We say “God bless America” without giving God His due, but I harbor the hope that those who say those words will seek God, and that immigrants will do the same.

“….then hear from heaven your dwelling place and forgive and render to each whose heart you know, according to all his ways, for you, you only, know the hearts of the children of mankind, that they may fear you and walk in your ways all the days that they live in the land that you gave to our fathers. Likewise, when a foreigner, who is not of your people Israel, comes from a far country for the sake of your great name and your mighty hand and your outstretched arm, when he comes and prays toward this house, hear from heaven your dwelling place and do according to all for which the foreigner calls to you, in order that all the peoples of the earth may know your name and fear you, as do your people Israel, and that they may know that this house that I have built is called by your name.” 2 Chronicles 6:30-33.

Oh Canada, are you polite or pathetic?

not an alien

Some Americans persist in believing that Canadians are the “most polite people in the world.” How about the most gullible, or passive, or apathetic? As of this writing, I can find no news items about Canadians protesting this censorship, and only 1 item about a free private showing in Canada–by a Christian ministry in Edmonton, May 14. A google search using the words “Canada banned unplanned” in different orders yields the same information, and the only media writing about the de facto ban are American. I found a webpage called, which I thought was Canadian but turned out to be American, a sort of radio free Europe of the internet (subtly equating Canadian censorship with communist propaganda?), with the motto “Because without America, there is no free world.” Sorry America-haters, it’s true.

OTTAWA, May 20, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) . Distribution companies are effectively banning the film Unplanned from screening in Canadian cinemas, according to the producers of the pro-life biopic. Chuck Konzelman, the film’s writer, director, and producer, told LifeSiteNews via email that at least one of the two largest Canadian film distributors said “content” rather than a lack of consumer demand is the reason for banning the film. According to Konzelman, Canadian law requires that films have distributors so that they can be shown theatrically. In addition, no rating from one of the provincial film boards can be granted, because the producers must list a distributor on the application forms to the film boards.

Konzelman confirmed that Canada’s largest distributor, Mongrel Media, turned down the film because of its “content.” Writing that Mongrel’s response begs the question, “What’s wrong with our content?” he confirmed that there is “nothing objectionable in the film; no foul language, no nudity, no sexuality, and the only violence is that which is necessarily connected with an abortion procedure.” He concluded that “it’s the pro-life message itself which is objectionable” to the distributors. Konzelman said Cineplex gave “unsatisfactory answers” when asked why it did not distribute Unplanned. He said it is highly unusual for a successful indie U.S. film to lack theatrical distribution in Canada.

I used to love traveling to and in Canada, but I haven’t been there for many years. I would bet they are still pretty nice folks, and quiet, compared to us. But then, they have no equivalent of our First Amendment rights or our view of government needing the consent of the governed. I don’t equate silence with politeness.

The other Mueller report.

(Note on spelling: his last name appears in publications both as Muller, with 2 dots above the U, and Mueller). George Mueller was one of the giants of faith to ever live, walking by faith rather than sight. He founded, and God provisioned, orphanages throughout Great Britain. His life was a testament to the efficacy of prayer, and the aphorism “God is seldom early but never late.” When I write “giant of faith”, I mean the grace of faith rather than the gift of faith. This distinction is vital for Christians to understand. The gift of faith, named in 1 Corinthians 12:9, is hoping that something “miraculous” could be done–like saving his wife from a terminal illness–but if it does not come to pass, it was not sin that you didn’t absolutely believe. An extreme biblical example would be David praying and fasting that God would spare his and Bathsheba’s first child. He knew God had decreed the child’s death but was hoping for God to relent due to his prayers.

George Mueller was adamant that his was the grace of faith, which is believing that God will honor His promises. He promises our daily provision. Not believing God’s explicit promises is sin. The most important point here is that the grace of faith is available for every believer; the gift of faith is not. You and I can look at George Mueller’s life and, rather than dismiss it as not applying to us because of his great gift, we can live it because we have the same grace.

Here is the very heart of his ministry: John Piper writes about and quotes Pastor Mueller. He built five large orphan houses and cared for 10,024 orphans in his life. When he started in 1834 there were accommodations for 3,600 orphans in all of England and twice that many children under eight were in prison. One of the great effects of Mueller’s ministry was to inspire others so that “fifty years after Mr. Mueller began his work, at least one hundred thousand orphans were cared for in England alone.” He had read his Bible from end to end almost 200 times. He had prayed in millions of dollars (in today’s currency) for the Orphans and never asked anyone directly for money. He never took a salary in the last 68 years of his ministry, but trusted God to put in people’s hearts to send him what he needed. He never took out a loan or went into debt. And neither he nor the orphans were ever hungry.

But let us not think this is about works. The orphan ministry was not successful because he put orphans first, but because he put God first. He testifies: The reason he is so adamant about this is that his whole life—especially in the way he supported the orphans by faith and prayer without asking anyone but God for money—was consciously planned to encourage Christians that God could really be trusted to meet their needs. We will never understand George Mueller’s passion for the orphan ministry if we don’t see that the good of the orphans was second to this.

The three chief reasons for establishing an Orphan-House are: 1. That God may be glorified, should He be pleased to furnish me with the means, in its being seen that it is not a vain thing to trust in Him; and that thus the faith of His children may be strengthened. 2. The spiritual welfare of fatherless and motherless children. 3. Their temporal welfare.

And make no mistake about it: the order of those three goals is intentional. He makes that explicit over and over in his Narrative. The orphan houses exist to display that God can be trusted and to encourage believers to take him at his word.

This discovery of the all-encompassing sovereignty of God became the foundation of Mueller’s confidence in God to answer his prayers for money. He gave up his regular salary. He refused to ask people directly for money. He prayed and published his reports about the goodness of God and the answers to his prayer. These yearly reports were circulated around the world, and they clearly had a huge effect in motivating people to give to the orphan work. Mueller knew that God used means. In fact, he loved to say, “Work with all your might; but trust not in the least in your work.” But he also insisted that his hope was in God alone, not his exertions and not the published reports. These means could not account for the remarkable answers that he received.

Mueller’s faith that his prayers for money would be answered was rooted in the sovereignty of God. When faced with a crisis in having the means to pay a bill he would say, “How the means are to come, I know not; but I know that God is almighty, that the hearts of all are in His hands, and that, if He pleaseth to influence persons, they will send help.” That is the root of his confidence: God is almighty, the hearts of all men are in his hands, and when God chooses to influence their hearts they will give.

After the death of his first wife, who he loved deeply, his words demonstrate the cluster of unshakable convictions and experiences that are the key to this remarkable life. “I am in myself a poor worthless sinner.”I have been saved by the blood of Christ.” “I do not live in sin.”God is sovereign over life and death. If it is good for her and for me, she will be restored again. If not she won’t.”My heart is at rest.” I am satisfied with God.” All this comes from taking God at his word. There you see the innermost being of George Mueller and the key to his life. The word of God, revealing his sin, revealing his Savior, revealing God’s sovereignty, revealing God’s goodness, revealing God’s promise, awakening his faith, satisfying his soul. “I was satisfied with God.”