|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
[Craving even more FPM content? Sign up for FPM+ to unlock exclusive series, virtual town-halls with our authors, and more. Click here to sign up.]
I dreamed the other night that I was wanted by the British police. And in the dream I wasn’t even in Britain. I was in New York, where I’d attracted the attention of British authorities by putting up a political poster, or something like that. But even though I was outside of their jurisdiction, the British police were after me. They were going to arrest me, put me on trial, and have me jailed for my opinions. I was apparently facing two to three years in the hoosegow. Such, in my dream, was the reach of British “justice.”
It was a nice dream to wake up from.
The reason for my dream is obvious. These days, even if you’re not living in Britain, you’ve got to be terrified by the speed with which British liberty is going down the tubes.
And it’s not just liberty, of course. Pretty much everything British is being dismantled – in many cases by the very people who are responsible for preserving it.
In Shakespeare’s hometown, Stratford-upon–Avon, the Shakespeare’s Birthplace Trust has decided that it’s necessary to “decolonize” the museum devoted to the Bard’s life and work. The museum experience, they’ve said, needs to be more “inclusive.” Shakespeare’s plays, you see, promote “white European supremacy,” and something needs to be done about that.
This announcement comes two years after the Globe theater in London, modeled on the playhouse in which many of Shakespeare’s works were first performed, warned patrons that A Midsummer Night’s Dream is awash in “misogyny and racism.” Several theatergoers have written articles complaining that the texts of the Shakespeare plays performed at the Globe these days have been radically revised to avoid offending and to make politically correct points.
Then there’s the National Trust, which is charged with maintaining hundreds of historic properties in the UK. In recent years, it’s been laboring overtime to destroy Britain’s good name. You’ve heard of the New York Times’s 1619 Project, which sought to depict American history as being irredeemably tainted by the evil of slavery? Well, the National Trust has tried to do exactly the same thing for Britain, commissioning a report which concluded that the trafficking of black slaves by evil white men was central to the formation of today’s Britain.
Never mind that it was Britain whose Royal Navy, staffed by white men, put an end to the Atlantic slave trade – a noble and selfless pursuit that they carried out at great physical risk to themselves and great economic expense to their country. Two centuries later, slavery continues to exist in many majority non-white countries – a fact that organizations like the National Trust refuse to acknowledge.
So dishonest is the National Trust about these and other matters that a group called Restore Trust was founded some time ago to address its systematic denigration of everything that those stately country houses and gardens stand for.
But it’s the loss of British liberty that is most striking to an outsider. Some of us have known about it for quite a while. Others were unaware of it until Vice President J.D. Vance delivered his now famous Munich speech on February 14. He cited worrying examples of clampdowns on free speech in several European countries, but, quite rightly – given the special ties between the U.S. and UK and the speed with which our Mother Country is destroying itself – he saved the UK for last, and dwelled on it the longest.
In Britain, warned Vance, “the backslide away from conscience rights has placed the basic liberties of religious Britons, in particular, in the crosshairs.” He discussed the case of an Army veteran named Adam Smith-Connor, who’d been fined thousands of pounds for “standing 50 meters from an abortion clinic and silently praying for three minutes.”
Vance could have mentioned hundreds of similar cases. Actor-turned-activist Laurence Fox highlighted one of them just the other day. In a video, a Times Radio producer named Maxie Allen told about how he and his partner, Rosalind, had been arrested in front of their three-year-old daughter on grounds of “harassment and malicious communications” and hauled off to jail. The supposed grounds for the arrests: critical comments about the child’s school that they’d both posted on a private online group for the school’s parents. The whole experience, Allen said, was “Kafkaesque,” “surreal,” “bizarre.”
Fox’s comment on the video was blunt: Britain’s police, he wrote, “are gangsters and thugs” who are “drunk on their own pathetic sense of importance” and who “use intimidation and harassment as their weapons.” This from a man who, in better days, played a cop – a good cop – on the TV series Inspector Lewis. “Do not allow yourself to be bullied,” Fox urged. Alas, most Brits seem, even now, to be able to live with the knowledge that their fellow citizens are being bullied by their government.
Which brings us back to my dream. The proximate reason for it, I realize, was a March 28 report by GB News. It concerned Prime Minister Keith Starmer, who since assuming office last July has repeatedly denied claims that he presides over a system of “two-tier” policing – i.e., policing that lets Muslim rapists off lightly but that punishes non-Muslims severely for publicly acknowledging the reality of Muslim rape. In a recent article for FrontPage, Daniel Greenfield provided several examples showing that the British police and courts now routinely treat sane criticism of Islam “as a vicious hate crime” but regard statements like “curse the Jews” as inoffensive.
Now, it appeared that Starmer had decided to own up to this approach.
Here’s what happened. The Sentencing Council, one of the notorious “quangos” that operate independently from the British government but that wield extraordinary power when it comes to establishing official rules and policies, recently set new guidelines that would make “two-tier” policing the explicit law of the land, with white men, in the words of a GB News reporter, being “treated a lot tougher” than other demographic groups in courts of law.
Starmer has the authority to close down the Sentencing Council – which would be a cause for celebration – but instead he made it clear to an interviewer the other day that he might well allow the council’s guidelines to be put into place.
Yes, “two-tier” policing in Britain is already standard practice. But to make it obligatory – to put it in writing – would be a chilling step away from equality under the law.
And it’s a step that’s been a long time coming. It was way back in 2013 that FrontPage’s Robert Spencer, a world-class expert on Islam, who’d been scheduled to speak on that topic in London, was banned from Britain because Home Secretary Theresa May decided that his entry into the country would not be “conducive to the public good.”
Meanwhile, who isn’t banned from the UK? Meet Hamid Patel. He’s a mufti (a sharia jurist) who until recently was the headmaster of a school in Blackpool where, as Giulio Meotti reported, he was “the first in the country to ask pupils to wear the hijab outside of school, to ‘recite the Koran at least once a week’ and to ‘not carry stationery containing non-Islamic images.’ And while he was at it, Patel also invited a Saudi imam to speak badly of Jews, which never hurts.”
Patel is not only free to live in the UK – he’s just been named the head of Ofsted, Britain’s powerful Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills. Meotti quoted a French imam, Hassen Chalghoumi, who is famous for having supported Nicolas Sarkozy’s burqa ban, as saying that Patel is so far out there ideologically that you’d “never see such an appointment in the Arab and Muslim world, except in Afghanistan and Iran.”
Patel isn’t alone. As the British writer Ian Andrew-Patrick lamented recently: “Our political parties, law courts and councils are almost completely controlled by first or second-generation foreigners.” This is unquestionably truer of the UK than of any country in Europe.
Beside Starmer’s statement, there’s another likely reason for that dream of mine. On March 21, England’s High Court refused to allow Tommy Robinson to lodge a protest against the conditions of his imprisonment at HMP Woodhill, where he’s serving an 18-month sentence for contempt of court after a transfer from HMP Belmarsh. Tommy wanted to challenge the fact that he’s been kept in solitary confinement since last November – a situation that has resulted in a worrying decline in his physical and mental health. But the judge had no mercy.
Friends and supporters of Tommy who’ve visited him are seriously concerned that he may not survive his current term of imprisonment. In fact, Tommy dying behind bars seems to be the plan. The British establishment recognizes Tommy as a symbol and spokesman for all British citizens who don’t approve of their country’s Islamization. The establishment, for its part, seems to be divided among cowards whose goal is to make the transfer of power as painless as possible, fools who still don’t see where their country is headed, and Muslims who will be the country’s new top dogs when the transfer of power is completed.
As things get progressively worse in Britain, I keep returning to the same question: Why? Yes, all of Western Europe is headed down the same road. But in other countries, there are significant numbers of people who are trying desperately to put on the brakes. Even established political parties on the Continent have recognized that their countries are in trouble. (It was fifteen years ago that Angela Merkel publicly admitted that multiculturalism had failed.) But in Britain the madness continues unabated.
Decades ago I studied English at both the undergraduate and graduate level, which involved reading both British and American literature – and becoming even more steeped than I already was in the history of both countries. I was intensely aware of the many differences between the U.S. and the UK. But on some level I thought of us as all being fundamentally the same, with (among other things) a shared devotion to Magna Carta and common law and a shared popular culture, from the Beatles to Monty Python to James Bond.
But oh, how wide the Atlantic really is! Recently I’ve been poking through Becoming a Londoner (2013), which is the American novelist David Plante’s diary of his life in 1960s London, during which he learned a good deal about the changes he’d have to make in himself in order to fit in.
“Dear boy,” the poet Stephen Spender chided him, “you do have an American way of asking questions that are too personal. If you are to become truly British, you must understand that we British do not indulge in the personal.” Spender granted that Plante was well-mannered, but added that when it came to British manners, he had “more to learn” – for example, about the proper placement on dinner tables of silverware, placement cards, and finger bowls. Later in the book, Plante laments that he’s “incapable of that utter distancing of feeling from death, even from grief, which I think of as English.”
Needless to say, these generalizations are more true of Britain’s elites than of its working class. Still, it’s fair to say the following. First, manners are big in the UK, and also in places like Italy and France (where you’re expected to initiate even the most trivial transaction by saying “Bonjour, madame…”), but not in the Low Countries and Scandinavia (where there’s barely a word for “please”). Second, emotional distance is big in the UK and northern Europe, where next-door neighbors can remain strangers for years, but not in the Mediterranean countries, where, over drinks, strangers can become friends in a moment.
Which raises the question: could it be that the uniquely British combination of these two things, manners and emotional distance, is partly responsible for the uniquely colossal failure of the British to deal with the unpleasant reality of Islamization? In other words, does that unpleasant reality at once demand of them that they be more unmannerly than their own standards would permit, and at the same time require of them more emotional engagement than they’re capable of? Just a thought.
Marxists and Islamists joined forces to destroy freedom in the Uk and Western Europe. Problem is islamists will soon devour their Marxist allies and Marxists are too ignorant and maniacally ignorant and sociopathic to see it.
Iran is the standout example of just that.
The mullahs and the marxist combined to take down the Shah, and then the mullahs turned on the marxists and killed the ones they could get their hands one while the rest fled to Western democracies for safety.
And Christian conservatives on the Right are too ignorant and willfully ignorant to see that religion is at the root of collectivism and totalitarianism.
Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are all weaponized for totalitarian theocracy but the crucial difference is that Judaism and Christianity have been leashed, tamed, defanged, and diluted by the Renaissance (the rebirth of reason) and the Age of Enlightenment the light of reason) and Islam has not.
“The medievals understood much better than the moderns on what basis to build a totalitarian society that would last and not collapse in less than a century. They did it and the people in the rising religious movement today know that full well. They’re the ones who have millions, upon millions, upon millions, of followers and a real insight into the fact that economics is not the crucial factor, but philosophy and culture are…. Religion has been the root of [totalitarianism] from the beginning, it has ruled in disguised forms, and still is, and now the disguise had to be stripped off… What socialism is doing is really helping religion, the bigger the statism, the more people grow accustomed to government rule over everything, the more people are ready for religionists to take over the lead from the more secular side… The socialists are building the basis for totalitarianism but only the religionists are going to cash in on it and take over.” – Leonard Peikoff
I can only speak for Christianity, but you’re on crack. Christianity at its VERY CORE is voluntary. God does not make you love him or follow him. We all have free will in that relationship. It is stated over and over and over, throughout the Bible. You’re free to deny or walk away from that relationship at any time….
You’re being a Cafeteria Christian and evading the full context of the Christian theology. The full context is namely this, according to Christianity Adam and Eve disobeyed Yahweh by eating from the Tree of Knowledge and Yahweh punished them by throwing them out of the Garden of Eden. We are all, according to Christianity, eternally doomed sinners against Yahweh, and in need of salvation. The only way to avoid eternal damnation in Hell is too submit obediently and humbly to Jesus as your savior and king or be damned to the torture chamber of Hell for eternity.
That’s not exactly the freedom and liberty to pursue your personal happiness on earth as you wish and desire. It would actually be an offer you can’t refuse from an Almighty Vito Corleone. The Christian definition of freedom is the freedom of choosing to submit yourself to King Jesus or he will damn you to a torture chamber for eternity, that’s not the secular and rational definition of freedom at all.
“All rights rest on the ethics of egoism. Rights are an individual’s selfish possessions—his title to his life, his liberty, his property, the pursuit of his own happiness. Only a being who is an end in himself can claim a moral sanction to independent action. If man existed to serve an entity beyond himself, whether God or society, then he would not have rights, but only the duties of a servant.” – Leonard Peikoff
“That’s not exactly the freedom and liberty to pursue your personal happiness on earth as you wish and desire.”
That statement is the wrong premise. God is the beginning, not any of us. He wasn’t made, we were. Man was given a simple directive by the Creator, and he willing disobeyed that command, and then sin was passed on to us by our parents. We do need to be saved, and the Lord Jesus Christ did all the hard work for us.
Are you really going to dispute the fact that you’re a sinner? What are you going to do about all that?
“The only way to avoid eternal damnation in Hell is too submit obediently and humbly to Jesus as your savior and king or be damned to the torture chamber of Hell for eternity.”
And that statement is not really true. It’s believing the gospel of God’s grace:
Romans 4:5 “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”
And, it’s a “free gift.” Is a gift hard to take?
Romans 5:18 “…the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.”
As a non-religious person who has no use for anyone’s religion, I say, you’re full of something and it ain’t beans! Leave the religious people alone. They mean well, mostly.
Matt is right, THX. You and objectivists are no theologians – but your understanding of Christianity is, maybe, slightly improving. Erase the idea of “works righteousness” / submission and add Matt’s understanding to your theology. It is this:
Christianity ALONE is unlike any other religion. In all others, you must work and work to EARN your salvation – never sure if you have done enough to earn a pass from Perfection. God’s Salvation is not based upon any human work – including submission. It is based upon belief – and ALWAYS has been. Abraham BELIEVED God and the LORD accounted that belief to him as righteousness (Genesis 15: 6). For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whomsoever BELIEVES on Him shall have everlasting life (John 3:16).
Got it? Faith. Belief. Once you do that, you get a new heart and a new life that desires freely to submit and obey – proving the paradox that only in serving the LORD man finds perfect freedom (and life and peace).
Adam and Eve are from the Jewish Bible the Torah.
One can “walk away” from God, so to speak; and if one did, like Bart Campolo, son of evangelist Tony Campolo, and they had truly got saved, they’re still a son of God.
2 Timothy 2:13 “If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.”
If Bart Campolo truly got saved, he will find himself in heaven with the Lord one day, even though he may renounced the Lord.
Matt, If someone is truly saved, he cannot walk away from God – not permanently. If one does walk away from Him, he was never truly saved in the first place.
The full quote:
2 Timothy 2: 11 It is a trustworthy saying:
For if we died with Him, we will also live with Him;
12 If we endure, we will also reign with Him;
If we will deny Him, He also will deny us;
13 If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself.
Kynarion, it seems I couldn’t reply directly to you. Anyway, this reply is to you.
Assuming Bart Campolo is truly saved, he still is saved and will be with the Lord one day (spiritually Bart is in the Lord, now.). However, according to his own statements and testimony, he did in fact “walk away” from God and become an atheist. That is as far as Bart is concerned.
As far as God is concerned, Bart is in His Son forever.
Unfortunately, saved men and women can walk away from. God. Our example:
2 Timothy 4:10 “For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world…”
Though Demas did that unfortunate thing, he was still a saved man.
And as far as the Lord denying the saint, that context you sited has to do with the Lord denying a saints position in reigning. It is not denying their salvation.
Matt, I believe, as you do, the scriptures teach eternal security. But I am more hesitant to judge the hearts or status of others’ salvation – only the LORD knows those who are His own. And those who belong to the LORD will persevere to the end, their faith proving genuine by the trial of their perseverance. And the faith by which they persevere is not the result of works, but the gift of God.
https://www.masters.edu/thinking_blog/faith-is-a-gift/
Our difference is, to my mind, of no consequence theologically, and does not separate us as Christians.
“And Christian conservatives on the Right are too ignorant and willfully ignorant to see that religion is at the root of collectivism and totalitarianism.”
But you are smarter than all of us. You see the dangers of Christianity, don’t you. I’m gonna start a blog called “THX cribs Lenny Piehole.”
The only problem is I will run out of material pretty quickly. The subject is so boring, predictable and repetitive.
It’s kind of like Objectivism. The subject is so boring, predictable and repetitive. See, I’m already out of new material. As are you. But somehow I missed the part about the religious totalitarianism and theocracy starting tomorrow.
For all your criticism of Christianity and Judaism, you have no description of what government would be produced by your religion / ideology. It is easy to criticize, hard to create. Objectivism is an ungrateful parasite.
Objectivism has no soaring vision, materialistic to the end. Where would Christians like me fit into your society? We would be life unworthy of life. Rand wished to live in a society created by Christian laws and principles and is one of the many kinds of parasites who immigrated here to criticize us while eating our bread at our table.
Objectivism cannot produce the societies it criticizes. It promises “freedom” but has a weak definition of it: choice without coercion limited only by “harm” to another. Its vision cannot conceive of or embrace a government for the common good based upon inherent human dignity. It could not produce a government that could unite its people for war, but make not mistake, it would need those who would make the ultimate sacrifice.
Reason alone is not enough, having no transcendental standard of moral good upon which to base righteous laws. And reason will not prevent the natural human tendency to desire power for the sake of self aggrandizement and oppression of its people.
Christianity, while suffering from the hubris of man, has in its doctrine, a blueprint for reform. And has done so. The Jews are a peaceful religion hated by tyrants over the centuries because God is sovereign, not man. Don’t mistake fighting for survival with conquest. Islam cannot be reformed unless they re-write Satan’s Bible.Their desire for world domination is right in their book. Marxists and Islam are currently allied in the destruction of western culture. If successful, the destruction of civilization will really begin. Marxists and Muslims vying for domination will be ugly. Both result in the slavery of mankind. As usual you are only half right. Your hatred of religion has been obvious. But the biggest enemy of man is man himself.
Thank you for your comments. I appreciate them even when I disagree with them. They are thought provoking.
It is unfortunate that some commenters find it necessary to demonize those with a different viewpoint. I subscribe to Tom Woods’ postings. The following is what he included today..
“If you think one thing about something the White House does, and I think the opposite, we are still not enemies. As fellow dissidents we owe each other the benefit of the doubt that we are each doing our best to discern what the right course of action is.”
damn dude – I didn’t think you were that much of a whack job – I am not a religious person but I have studied the Bible with an awesome scholar for nearly 40 years – I am not into religion because it’s human – I prefer not to have my connection with YHVH and Yeshua Messiah Lord Jesus Christ unbroken because the same old tired message from the pulpit
Religion built societies before humans put in their laws – There has been jihad Christianity that my people endured all over the planet – Frankly, humans just do not understand the Bible and take it at face value –
Perhaps you can reword your comment – not that I revisit articles I just read and commented on
“An individual can be hurt in countless ways by other men’s irrationality, dishonesty, injustice. Above all, he can be disappointed, perhaps grievously, by the vices of a person he had once trusted or loved. But as long as his property is not expropriated and he remains unmolested physically, the damage he sustains is essentially spiritual, not physical; in such a case, the victim alone has the power and the responsibility of healing his wounds. He remains free: free to think, to learn from his experiences, to look elsewhere for human relationships; he remains free to start afresh and to pursue his happiness.”
― Leonard Peikoff, Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand
It’s the modern equivalent of the Molotov Ribbentrop pact. The communists and the Nazis put aside their differences to defeat their common enemy, us. Russia thereby creating World War 2.
So true, to get a greater understanding read this book.
United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror Hardcover – 3 Mar. 2009
by Jamie Glazov (Author)
United in Hate analyzes the Left’s contemporary romance with militant Islam as a continuation of the Left’s love affair with communist totalitarianism in the twentieth century. Just as the Left was drawn to the communist killing machines of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Castro, so too it is now attracted to radical Islam. Both the radical Left and radical Islam possess a profound hatred for Western culture, for a capitalist economic structure that recognizes individual achievement and for the Judeo-Christian heritage of the United States. Both seek to establish a new world order: leftists in the form of a classless communist society and Islamists in the form of a caliphate ruled by Sharia law. To achieve these goals, both are willing to wipe the slate clean by means of limitless carnage, with the ultimate goal of erecting their utopia upon the ruins of the system they have destroyed.
While I agree with points made with regard to Marxists and Islamists joining forces in the West, the thing that most hit me about Bawer’s article was the way the “normies”—that is: ALL the people who aren’t very political, & who just want to go about their dreary day without their “mainstream” media informing them that “the right”, or some equivalent entity, or Trump, is upsetting their apple cart in some way—are so happy to just roll over for both the Marxists and the Islamists.
There are normies of that sort here—both Democrat and Republican, including some GOP office holders. As long as legacy media isn’t fussing about something, then the world must be basically OK.
Leftists worked tirelessly to depose and persecute the Shah—and the first thing Khomeini did after taking power was either exile, imprison, or execute those Leftists.
Unfortunately, those harsh lessons have been entirely lost on the Brain-Dead Left.
It’s the New World Order . Most of our NATO ” allies ” are doing it . It’s Trump and most of the American right , against the world .
Trump is a God-send, may he keep on blowing his Trumpet in truth & righteousness.
If you don’t stand for something, you will fall for anything. The problem with the British, males in particular, is simple: most of the British males have been socialized to think and behave like women. That is to say, they’ve been feminized. A feminized male is easily frightened and to timid to stand and fight for anything.
This way back look to the future take on the current madness captures the sense of futility while we witness the suicide of a nation and all its heritage with the sure knowledge that it will never be resurrected. It was preserved in a corpus of belief, like a wisp of smoke, and now is gone. The weakening began decades ago and brought a passivity with it. World Wars have an aftermath and a weakened, hollowed out culture is part of that. After all, if the heritage was so great, why didn’t it prevent the annihilation of so many.
Today the shared reality in the UK and US is the voluntary seclusion of the average citizen. A logical endpoint. It became almost an exalted status during the Covid lockdowns and is now the way of much of the western world. Futility is out there, Margaret, stick to your knitting. Closely.
The US is faced with staggering corruption in its federal govt that may with the right tripwire lead quickly to a civil war while the UK could, in the not too distant future, with EU allies, become a nuclear threat to the US, especially if the MAGA momentum continues and threatens the ascendant Islamic hegemony worldwide. Meanwhile the secluded lack all conviction and pass the day in stunned silence, hoping all the strife will go away from their door. The final irony has yet to play out.
But the elements as they say in Hollywood are all in place for another nasty bit of war.
Feeling a bit stunned and secluded myself. Hence my nom de plume.
Toi paraphrase the Beatles played backward–“England is dead, man, missit, missit, missit.”
Maybe they’re pickled in alcohol which allows for that stiff upper lip and deadening of emotions. If they ever totally sober up, they will find themselves in a Muslim theocracy.
But to be honest, are we any better here in the US of A? have you heard that Texas has Pakistani day and is importing a giant Sharia law city? Yee Haw!
I can’t say how disappointed I am in that, as a generational Texan (great great grandfather, one of the first Texas Rangers). Me thinks there is a horrifying awakening coming which will end in enslavement and execution or another Crusade — which aint gonna look like a fashion show either.
That is what happens when you stand around like passive sheep before far left liberal lunatics and cowardly accept their bullsh*t and do nothing. Far leftists say what they say and do what they do because they know that other side fears them and are too afraid to do anything of any meaningful consequence to thwart or stop them.
I’m sure some will disagree with what I’ve said but that is the objective truth. If it’s not then explain why the left regularly gets away with violence of all sorts and almost never prosecuted for their actions. Fear and intimidation is the only rational explanation for why that is so.
This isn’t just a response to one person but to all the comments I’ve read so far in this thread.
That being said, a few things…
One, I am a Christian, and as such I don’t force ANYONE to live a certain way, I LOVE everyone, because as Jesus said, the most important commandment is to love the Lord God with all your heart and love your neighbor. So I don’t tell people how to live their life, I accept them however they are and love them whether we have the same morals or not, they are free to act however they want, so Christianity is not totalitarian.
This isn’t just a response to one person but to all the comments I’ve read so far in this thread.
That being said, a few things…
One, I am a Christian, and as such I don’t force ANYONE to live a certain way, I LOVE everyone, because as Jesus said, the most important commandment is to love the Lord God with all your heart and love your neighbor. So I don’t tell people how to live their life, I accept them however they are and love them whether we have the same morals or not, they are free to act however they want, so Christianity is not totalitarian.
Secondly, I have been following global politics and the decline towards our loss of freedoms for a while now, and it’s not a fear of the left or a passive attitude that is going to bring about, or “let” corrupt totalitarians to take over and strip us of our rights, whether it be leftists or Islamists, globalists or communists, it’s just destiny. The Bible prophesied that this would happen. God already told us what is going to happen in the Bible. There will be a totalitarian one world government. I’ve sat here and watched how things have been playing out and felt so much confusion and frustration when I see our loss of rights coalescing and I’ve wondered “how do more people not realize this is going on? How are more people not waking up and doing something about it?” Which brings me back to my point. It’s been prophesied! That means it’s going to happen. It’s not a matter of negligence by the free thinking people of the world, or a fear to act, it’s just how it ends. The decpetiveness and behind the scenes allegiances of the globalists along side whatever totalitarian governments or ideological groups you care to include, not to mention the cia, is going to amount to exactly what God said is going to happen. That’s why He said it. There’s no getting around it. That’s just the unfortunate eventual fate of the world. Look at the club of Rome throughout the 1900’s and the meetings held between billionaires, the cia and Chinese in 2019 right before covid, when they were literally planning how to use fear of a pandemic to pave way for loss of freedoms. Look at the world economic forum and their goal of “you will own nothing”. They are all working together towards their goal and i really don’t think it’s far off. America may run into a civil war or have a run of super left leaders that give into the globalist agenda or it may just be attacked in a more traditional war.
But there’s no fighting it. If it was avoidable then God wouldn’t have said “hey this is going to happen”. BTW if your not a believer, I would take time and consider how it’s even possible that such a “coincidence” as the Bible prophecying the end of freedom and a one world government taking over was written down almost 2 millenia ago. It’s playing out exactly as predicted. So if your not a Christian I would encourage you to give that some thought.
Anyways, thirdly, the only thing left to do IS to confront the idea of God and reconcile your own relationship with Him while you still have a chance. The world is going down in a flurry of terrible, unavoidable events, especially for free minded individuals. The Bible predicted “global warming” millenia ago (just not with that term) it said “an increase in earth quakes, fires, and famine as the time draws near”. So, what to do since all of this is coming to bear? Reconcile your eternal status while you can because we don’t have much longer, so turn your attention to what will happen to you after this world goes down.
And if you have any questions about anything I said, be it prophecies that have already come to pass, like the Bible saying Israel would become a nation again and in fact it did, or questions about Jesus or Christianity in general (even science related stuff) I’m more than willing and actually really enjoy answering or even debating any of it. My email is wrcspammer90@gmail.com I would love to hear from you. I probably won’t be checking this thread again unfortunately, it’s just too hard to keep up with all of them with how busy life is.
God bless you guys I hope you have a goodnight and you find peace
With all the love in my heart for all of you,
A random Christian named Dustin
This is all happening because the Saudis bought almost all of Britain following the oil crisis of the early 70’s if I remember correctly.
As for quango’s being independent from government, that is a lie that Tony Bliar built after Maggie Thatcher tried to get rid of them.
If any organisation cannot survive without government support then it is not NONE government.
It took me two looks to realize that you did not misspell Tony’s name.
I would think the Japanese and the Chinese are more obsessed with politeness and emotional repression than the English but you don’t see them committing self-sacrificial suicide for the Muslims.
I agree. They do quite the opposite. They wrangle ’em up into slave factories and have them make car parts, computer chips and on and on …
I seem to remember the Japanese and the Germans hooked up for a common cause…….defeating us.
But then you always seem to have your own brand of non-existent world history.
Maybe you are a Chinese Objectivist.
Mr. Bawer, I’ve thought further about why the Japanese and Chinese although they are obsessed with politeness, saving face, and emotional repression to a higher degree than the British, nevertheless, are not sacrificing themselves and committing altruistic suicide for the Muslims, for the foreigner, for the stranger.
I believe the reason is that the Chinese and Japanese conception of altruist sacrifice for others is based on a tribal, national, and racial moral imperative. The Chinese, Japanese, as well as the Muslims, and the Nazis, will sacrifice themselves for their fellow tribesmen, the nation, the Ummah, the race, but will not sacrifice themselves for those who are not members of the tribe.
Originally Jewish salvation and altruism was for the Jewish tribe only, Yahweh was exclusively the Jewish tribal god. Christianity was the attempt to bring salvation and altruism to all of mankind. Christian altruism is much more universal. Christ sacrificed himself for all of mankind and all sinners. For friend, enemy, foreigner, and stranger. Although other Christian doctrines may no longer have a hold on many Brits and other Europeans, Christian altruism, explicitly or implicitly, is still the dominant moral code of Brits and European.
“The early Christians did contribute some good ideas to the world, ideas that proved important to the cause of future freedom. I must, so to speak, give the angels their due. In particular, the idea that man has a value as an individual — that the individual soul is precious — is essentially a Christian legacy to the West; its first appearance was in the form of the idea that every man, despite Original Sin, is made in the image of God (as against the pre-Christian notion that a certain group or nation has a monopoly on human value, while the rest of mankind are properly slaves or mere barbarians). But notice a crucial point: this Christian idea, by itself, was historically impotent. It did nothing to unshackle the serfs or stay the Inquisition or turn the Puritan elders into Thomas Jeffersons. Only when the religious approach lost its power — only when the idea of individual value was able to break free from its Christian context and become integrated into a rational, secular philosophy — only then did this kind of idea bear practical fruit.” – Leonard Peikoff
Marxists have no standards even for their own religion. They only understand money. That is the reason for their simple submission through bribery.
Buckingham Mosque? The Royal Imams? Royal Republican Guard? Big Mo?
Muslims know they can’t win on the battlefield, but they can at the Ballot Box. Once they’re in, it’s impossible to vote them out.
Tolerance. Appeasement. Diversity. All these led to NO-GO ZONES, Sharia Law, and when a Muslim rampages through the streets with a knife, they ban knives, even have drop boxes for them, but do Muslims turn theirs in? Like our Gun Buy Back programs where a criminal never brings his in and now leaves citizens powerless. “Grandpa and Grandma were robbed and murdered last night and they fell for the anti-gun agenda, and he sold his only hours before for a hundred dollars leaving them powerless.
BEWARE OF THE SLEEPER CELLS. Muslims act like they are peaceful, but they set up the Cells in the event the alarm rings. They plot their targets. And guess what their weapons are…. matches and gasoline setting a city on fire. How do you stop them when you don’t know who’s doing it, and even if you did find out they were Muslims, you still can’t do anything to them, profile them, because that’s Islamophobia. Surely not the peaceful Muslims. THEY’RE HERE… READY! Guess what? And millions of Americans will join them!
Your last sentence is the really awful truth.
Yes, and when Jihad really comes here, and the ones that side with them and are about to be executed by a Muslim, they’ll run to hide behind an NRA MEMBER they just spit on so that person can take the bullets and die for them. I also bet that they’d go to that person’s grave and piss on it! “You gun-toting White Supremacist and Islamofascist!”
“But oh, how wide the Atlantic really is!”
What a great turn of phrase.
The more remote a place or a country was from the atrocities of extremly powerful Islamic armies, the less the people of those places or countries fear Islam.
Austria had to fight a war of about 250 years against the Ottoman Empire..
It isn’t manners
(Austrian manners are more or less Mediterrenean, too)
But we are a bit fraught with bad associations with the “Türkenkriege” (Turkish wars)
Probably, that’s the reason we know better what islamisation is all about..
Suggested reading by Bat Ye’or-available at Amazon.
Eurabia
Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, (Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, January 30, 2005), is about the transformation of Europe into “Eurabia,” a cultural and political appendage of the Arab/Muslim world. Eurabia is fundamentally anti-Christian, anti-Western, anti-American, and antisemitic.
This was published in 2005….and here we are with Europe well along the way.
A living tragedy.
https://www.louiseperry.co.uk/p/the-coming-british-civil-war-david
Short answer to Mr. Bawer’s question: Yes. But British cultural norms work only for British people and their unique ways.
British elites set the tone against the will of the people. They blur the natural tendency to love and protect one’s own, killing the ordo amoris and blurring the line between friend and enemy.
King Charles is now the Defender of the FAITHS. Progressive lies require we accept in the name of “freedom” every religion and culture as equal and valid individual expressions. This brings a horrible future upon us and our children.
The foreign invaders know this is happening and it arouses their contempt and religious fervor to plunder and destroy us.
We need to start with the friend / enemy distinction beginning with the elites who always set the tone. If the elites will not do this, they will destroy their people or the people will destroy them.
The reason why the King with his attraction and admiration towards Islam the stealth jihad will advance at a faster rate. Regarding the King of England, his approval and respect for Islam is very revealing about his religious education he received in the Church of England, Which in the United Kingdom is also called “The Anglican Church.”
The King with is favorable spirit to Islam reveals that the Anglican church didn’t teach and ingrain the Bible doctrines about the Nature of Jesus into the his mind and heart when he was still a prince.
Likewise back then he was a prince his “higher education “ didn’t cover the many different aspects of how the religion of Islam rejects the many clear Bible teaching about the nature of Jesus.
For Islam denies the Bible doctrines about of and about the actual natural of Jesus which is blasphemous.
For Islam denies that Jesus is the Son of God. Meaning that Jesus of the only Son of God the Father. That is in blatant contradiction to the information revealed in the Bible.. As found, for example, Matthew 3:16, 17, First John 2:22, 23. Likewise, Jesus is God the Son, as seen in Hebrews 1:8. First John 5:20.
The Deity of the Son taught in the Bible .For in Colossians 2:9 It reads “For In Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form. ” [N.I.V.]
That Jesus is God is further revealed in the Bible in John 1-1-3. Colossians 1:15-17. Romans 9:5 Second Peter 1:1. Titus 2:13 First John 5:20.
Maybe the King of England really favors Islam over and before Christianity. As the top official of a Christian Church, that’s terrible.
Yes. Whatever England’s king favors, it is not his own people.
Islam denies the nature and religion of all those Jews or Christians it considers as prophets. It trumps any Christian replacement theology by retroactively treating all such prophets as Muslims. All Jews and Christians are then classed as apostates from Islam.
If King Charlies had been proselyted to Islam or not, he favors Islam ,with the politically correct climate in England he must have had conveniently forgotten about the deadly results of Islam in the United Kingdom. Such as the murderous Manchester jihad bombing that occurred on May, 22, 2017 that killed many young people, many of them girls. Before that, there was those deadly London which happened on July ,7, 2005.
Likewise, the King seems not to remember the deadly jihad train bombing Islamic vehicle and knife jihad attacks. London nor does the King appear recall the Muslim terrorist who, in London murdered a British police office with a hatchet attempting to cut off his head.
The deadly dangerous posed by Islam’s violent jihad hasn’t gone away in the UK. Therefore, it’s shameful that the King is “bending over backwards” to appease the Muslim mayor of London and the imams as well as the other Muslims in power in the government in the United Kingdom.
When a leader bends the backs of the people, the question to ask is, “Is he bending his palm with payoffs?”
A quick read of this article tells me why we had a revolution 250 years or so ago. This time is isn’t just the King, it’s the entire government. At 74 years old I remember history where Europe depended on the USA for it’s salvation. The US rebuilt Europe after WW2 to keep it from succumbing to Soviet communist. Since Europe had destroyed it’s self with war the US took over free world leadership. Unfortunately our leadership has proven no wiser. Instead of following President Washington’s advice to stay out of entangling alliances we have been instigating them. Also we have allowed the criminals in our government to foment “color revolutions” around the world, thus ensuring the hatred of our country by many in this world. Now they are trying to do it here.
It saddens me that Great Britain that at one point stood alone against Hitler is now joining the club of restricting speech just like the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Red China and numerous other totalitarian governments. I fear that a world wide war is on the horizon and we deserve it!.
The warning about entangling alliances had its good points. A major factor in the development of America was leaving the conflicts of the Old World behind. Then those of varied origins could live in America without conflict. Entanglement was part of the story of independence. British rule helped end the threat of French Canada. Then France and others helped end British rule. A major factor in the entanglement warning was the weakness of the new nation. There was also the problem of foreign interference domestically and its divisive and corrupt potential. Still, participation in trade and preventing threats always required firm national policies. Jefferson’s removal of France from Louisiana and opposition to Britain or France getting Spanish Cuba (1808) are examples. Disentanglement often requires entanglement.
Spent Nov 78 to Nov 80 in England in a USAF tour, so have a good affinity for the country. Very sad to see how bad it’s got. And on a forum often chat with Britons on a hobby but wouldn’t dare bring up politics.
What we’re seeing right now, to my alarm and disgust, is an almost-exact replay, line-by-line, scene-by-scene, and act-by-act, of the growing rot, tottering collapse, and final Fall to the Barbarians in the 4th and 5th Centuries, of Rome, climaxing in the sack of the City Herself by the barbarians in A.D. 476.
It’s literally the suicide of a once-great and noble civilization–“The West”–through timid, unresisting surrender to the barbarians as “not worth defending or fighting for,” helped along by the traitors within our own walls, as Rome was betrayed by insiders who opened the Salian Gate to the besieging barbarian armies on that dark night in 476.
I would say, “God help us!” except that I worry that He may give us what we deserve, and have brought down on our own heads.
I remember about 8 years ago or so watching a women in England being arrested for silently praying across the street from an abortion clinic. Almost couldn’t believe what I was watching.
Careful. Even writing that Starmer wants Tommy to die in prison ( for a civil crime, not criminal!) Could get you arrested in the UK I BET.
How is what Starmer et al doing to Mr. Robinson different from what Putin did to his last opponent Navalny who also died in prison for a trumped up charge? How low western elites have sunk!
It breaks my heart to see this happening in the UK. It’s being invaded by sub-human Islamists. All they do wherever they go is kill, rape and destroy.