The impossibility of neutrality in the culture war

 

I want to make myself abundantly clear, we are not merely in a culture war, we are at its tail end. If the powers of social collectivism have their way every underpinning principle upon which limited constitutional government under the Rule of Law depends will have been done away with in favour of an imposed world view which seeks to control the hearts and minds of mankind. These idea pathogens are manifestations of a pernicious ungodly ideology that is anti-Christian and anti-democratic to its core. It has come after our faith, our families, and our property to fulfill the warning from the Book of Revelation 13:17 KJV: “And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.” If you as a Christian think that it is possible to be found sitting on the fence in the midst of this totalizing enterprise which is a Satanic battle for the souls of men, you are sadly deluded and perhaps infected by this ideological pathogen yourself. Truth be known, I find it impossible to believe that you possess the New Birth if you have not taken up the fight on behalf of Christ to defend the faith and the Godly values it imparts to a sin sick world in desperate need of Christ and the Godly order that just government influenced by Christianity provides.

Merely preaching repentance without equipping the Church with the tools it needs to put on the full armour of God is insufficient to wage war against these demonic lies which, if possible, might even deceive the elect. God has not saved us from sin and united us with Christ in death and resurrection to be seated in Christ at the right hand of God the Father to fall victim to a cult of social collectivists who have made the idolatrous State their idol. But first we must understand the nature of the ideological deception we face and its origins to understand how it operates so that we may attack it both at its head and its roots. We live in an age where access to information is at our fingertips, literally, your smart phone and laptop have access to the world wide web where there is unlimited information on how these idea pathogens operate and their consequences on society here in the West. It is fascinating to note that the third world, the Muslim world, the Communist Chinese, and the Russians are almost totally unaffected by the species of idea pathogens that have completely taken over our universities and everything downstream of them. This is why these ideas are the concepts which are driving the totalizing enterprise of globalist control. Obscenely wealthy and powerful Besserwissers who are infected by a unique blend of Cultural Marxism and Fascism are demanding that we will own nothing and be happy. They are currently meeting in Davos as I am typing this. So, Pastors, teachers, deacons and elders, you are without excuse if you are not equipping the Church that God has entrusted in your care!

Yet there was one at Davos who was having none of it, the President of Argentina. From the Toronto Sun published January 17^th by WARMINGTON: “Argentina's president unleashes anti-woke storm at WEF. One thing for sure, it won’t be easy for Klaus Schwab to “penetrate” Argentine President Javier Milei’s cabinet.

And, he sure as heck will not be influencing it in any way, either. The World Economic Forum’s founder, or anybody else, didn’t need a translator to understand what Milei was saying Wednesday. Whether in Spanish or English, it was loud and clear: Socialism is bringing the world to its knees, and it has got to stop. 

“ The solution to be proposed by collectivists is not greater freedom but rather greater regulation which creates a downward (spiral) of regulations until we are all poorer and life for all of us depends on a bureaucrat sitting in a luxury office,” said Milei. Ouch. Talk about a skunk at garden party.

He spoke from experience since his own country had been utterly undone by socialism. Please listen to his remarks at the following link; https://www.youtube.com/live/-VwtRYZkYjU?si=na6nueEXTlIP_W0H

Then consider the following from Dr. A. James Gregor regarding the blending of the two major forms of social collectivism and his warnings regarding what he predicts would be their impact on the 21^st Century. A. James Gregor, a professor of political science at the University of California, Berkeley, wrote a book titled "The Two Faces of Janus: Marxism and Fascism in the Twentieth Century" in 2000¹. He argues that fascism emerged from a revision of Marxism that incorporated nationalism, racism, and totalitarianism. He also traces the influence of Marxist ideas on various fascist movements and regimes, such as Mussolini's Italy, Hitler's Germany, and Mao's China.

The preface from his book:

The turn of the century is as convenient an occasion as any to take stock of our time. It has been a time of trouble. Two world wars grew out of the “belle epoque”—and by the end of the century, more human beings would be killed by their own governments than would die in those wars. In attempting to understand something of that doleful reality, many have had recourse to the existence, in our century, of “fascism.” “Fascism,” we are told, was “one of the most glaring examples of political evil in modern history.”! Fascism, we have been told, was uniquely inhumane. We have been told that “anyone with any concern for human dignity can see the destructive effects of the fascist denigration of human life.”’ The implication of judgments of these kinds is that fascism, however that term is understood, is largely responsible for much of the devastation of the twentieth century. More than that, an effort has been made recently to identify “fascism” with “right-wing extremism,” and thereby credit the Right with virtually all the infamies of our time.’ Somehow or other, only the Right figures in the catalog of horrors that make up contemporary history. Yet almost everyone now acknowledges that the regimes of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot were stained with the blood of millions of innocent victims—more than those of the extreme right. We are left perplexed.

Even the most generous estimate would make the Left at least partially responsible for the mayhem that distinguishes our century. The political Right and the political Left seem to share something of a common malevolence. All that notwithstanding, some Western scholars continue to treat the political universe as though it were divided between the evil Right and the benign Left.

The thesis of the present work is that much of the literature of the twentieth century devoted to the analysis of violent revolution has failed to appreciate the central issues around which the insurrectionary violence of our time has turned. The failure of that literature is manifest in its treatment of the revolutions that followed the First World War—and which continue to the present—as being either of the Right or of the Left. Fascism is of the Right and Marxist-Leninist regimes are of the Left.

I will argue that the major systemic revolutions of our time have been of neither the Right nor the Left. Our error has been to attempt to force each revolutionary instance into a procrustean bed of preconceptions. To this day, some in the West remain convinced that while the revolutions of the Right have been unqualifiedly “pathological” and “homicidal,” those of the Left have been compassionate and benevolent—and that only extraneous circumstances produced the horrors of the Great Purge, the Great Proletarian Revolution, and the massacre of innocents by the Khmer Rouge.

There are others who, for at least two generations, have argued that the political universe we have known since the Bolshevik and Fascist revolutions has not been divided, primarily, by conflicts between the Right and Left, but between representative democracies and anti-democratic “ideocracies.” The contest has been between systems that base legitimacy on electoral results and those whose legitimacy and authority rest on appeal to an ideology considered inerrant, the guidance of a “charismatic leader,” and the armed persuasion of a hegemonic party. Among the latter movements and regimes there is no Right or Left. There are only anti-democratic systems.

However convenient and informative the distinction between Right and Left may be in local politics, it is largely irrelevant in dealing with the revolutionary movements that have shaped the international environment during the last hundred years. There have been many who have recognized as much.

This work is an effort to restate the case for the latter view. It attempts to supplement the argument advanced a quarter of a century ago that there is more “fascism” in the Left than most Western scholars have been prepared to recognize.” Recent developments in post-Soviet Russia and post-Maoist China eloquently make the case. I attempt to trace the decay of Marxist theory among left-wing intellectuals. Bereft of much of its mummery, Marxist theory reveals itself as a variant of generic fascism, The contest of the twentieth century, which has cost so much in human lives, was not between the Right and the Left. It was between representative democracies and their anti-democratic opponents. It has been an arduous struggle.

The anti-democratic temptation continues to have appeal to those who feel themselves to be oppressed and humiliated. One of the implications of the discussion in what follows is that, at the end of the century, there really is very little convincing evidence that the democracies have won the contest. That does not bode well for the twenty-first century.

Not bode well? Indeed not! As I mentioned in my last blog/vodcast, we have a Prime Minister who is walking manifestation of every idea pathogen inherent to this perverse blend of Cultural Marxism and Fascism. These idea pathogens include radical feminism, social constructivism, cultural relativism, postmodernism, political correctness, and identity politics, yet Trudeau believes that he and his friends at Davos must be granted total control over our energy sector and therefore the economy. Justin Trudeau has advanced an agenda that has been ruinous to the freedoms and prosperity of the land God has married us to. Moreover, he is a classic example of what he decries in others as “white privilege”. He is seemingly unaware of his own addled ideological contradictions because he is a unique mix of profound imbecility, incredible narcissism, and a completely parasitized mind.

You cannot fight an ideology that you do not understand. Worse you will not fight if you refuse to identify the threat and press on as Christian soldiers. It is up to you to be instant in season and out to know how to answer everyone with the word of truth which will be useful to counter the false ideology of our day. Every generation of believer were convinced that they lived in the end times. I hear too many who are convinced that they know Christ’s return is eminent. It may well be but when He comes it will be as a thief in the night. The reformers were convinced that the Pope was the anti-Christ since he claimed to have the keys to heaven, earth, and hell and have the power to absolve sin to an apostate church. If you doubt me read the dedicatory letter to the King James Bible which makes that point abundantly clear. They believed this because the Pope was manifesting the spirit of the anti-Christ. A spirit which will always be with us until the Lord returns. He is coming for a victorious church as spoken of in Ephesians 5: 27 “That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.” Not for a weak, ineffectual, sectarian, and divided body rife with conflicting doctrines that bring no glory to Christ. Educate yourself that you may do as admonished in 2 Timothy 4: 1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

I find it appalling that some of the most useful voices denouncing the ideological possession of the social collectivists are not believers. This is to the shame of those who ought to be at the forefront of this battle against false doctrine. Jordan B Peterson, Gad Saad, Stephen Hicks, James Lindsay just to name a few have done more to warn us of the dangers of this perverse ideology than any leading Christian voices have other than perhaps historian Dr. Victor Davis Hanson and the former Deputy Prime Minister of Australia John Anderson. Why is that? I have repeatedly offered my help to pastors to help develop speaking series on the leading false doctrine of our age and have been completely ignored or dismissed. That is not just a shame, it is a remarkable acknowledgement that those whose very sacred duty it is to shepherd the flock away from ravenous wolves would rather see them devoured than upset the applecart of their little fiefdom.