Gnosticism: why the elite make no sense to us

 

History repeats itself: the Gnostic cult of postmodern thinking

Today the west is being confronted with a Postmodern heresy closely related to the one the early Church fathers countered in their time. So, permit be to begin by discussing how Gnosticism posed an inherent threat to the early Church whose task it became was to counter false doctrines. This is essential for Christianity today since we are facing a similar crisis with Gnostic Postmodern WOKE ideologies. The reasons define how Gnosticism posed a significant threat to the early Christian Church:

Theological Differences: Gnosticism introduced beliefs that were fundamentally different from orthodox Christian teachings. Gnostics believed in a dualistic universe where the material world was created by a lesser, malevolent deity, and salvation was achieved through secret knowledge (gnosis). This contrasted sharply with the Christian belief in a single, benevolent God and salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.

Scriptural Interpretations: Gnostics often had their own interpretations of Christian scriptures or even their own texts, such as the Gospel of Thomas. These interpretations and texts sometimes contradicted the canonical gospels and teachings of the early church, leading to confusion and division among believers.

Authority and Unity: The early church was working to establish a unified doctrine and authority structure. Gnosticism, with its diverse and often secretive teachings, undermined this effort by promoting alternative leaders and doctrines. This threatened the unity and cohesion of the early Christian community.

Ethical Implications: Some Gnostic teachings led to ethical practices that were at odds with those of the early church. For example, some Gnostics believed that since the material world was evil, moral behavior in the physical realm was irrelevant. This could lead to either extreme asceticism or moral laxity, both of which were problematic for the early church’s emphasis on righteous living.

Overall, Gnosticism challenged the early church’s efforts to define and defend its core beliefs, maintain unity, and establish a consistent ethical framework. The church responded by condemning Gnostic teachings as heretical and working to clarify and codify orthodox Christian doctrine.

So, in today’s blog and vodcast I will attempt to demonstrate why the current attack on our cultural values is due to the Gnosticism inherent to authoritarianism in all its various socially collectivist forms. These manifestations of illiberalism are in fact expressions of gnostic mystery religions where only its priests can truly understand its hidden mysteries. This obviously seems to fly in the face of the fact that they deny the existence of God but only because we fail to recognize that its priests have made themselves into gods. This is why when we have heard them speak or read what they have written one is forced to wonder why their rhetoric often sounds like gobbledygook.

A musician friend of mine sent me an article written in one of the 4^th Estate's most notable Neo-Marxist rags that promoted an end to the use of coal as an energy source and asked Trudeau to interfere with shipping it abroad. I told my friend that I literally never read the TO Star. I have no use for the 4^th Estate which has become the disinformation arm of a government (taxpayer) funded cultural revolution. I said to him, "I do not think you are fully aware of how completely I have rejected the accepted Postmodern narrative." In the first grade when they made us sing, I am a little teapot short and stout I balked at it. I knew I was short but certainly not stout. Moreover, I knew I was not a teapot and was horrified at how the entire class, most emphatically the girls, went along with its idiotic gestures of the hip hold, extended arm, and tipping whilst singing its moronic ever so uncool white ungroovy lyrics. I do not do things in unison with others. I cannot march in lockstep with the current mandated thing. We now live in a society which blindly follows leaders who are marching us straight into a cultural abattoir. And for the fools who do not want coal to be used, the solution to using it cleanly is to install scrubbers in the chimneys of the plants who burn it. It is impossible to turn matter into energy without creating byproducts. I guess you idiots who danced the teapot passed that course with flying colours but flunked high school physics.

Why there is broad acceptance of the Postmodern narrative despite it sounding like nonsense:

For at least 60 years dialectics have crept their way into the prevailing Postmodern narrative. In rejecting God its creators have founded a new Hegelian mystery religion where only its priests can see behind the curtain of Gnostic knowledge. Which is why to the uninitiated it appears to be based upon madness. Believe it or not this explains the reason for the deliberate outcome of what the Postmodern priests label as progress being madness since we lack the secret knowledge to understand what progress means.

Every single totalitarian ideology has been built on Hegelian Dialectical thinking. Its influence on the Postmodern narrative is among the best documented phenomena of our time! It borrows from the Platonic idea of the Demiurge. The concept of the Demiurge, as originally presented by Plato and later adapted by various philosophical and religious traditions has not been explicitly adopted by totalitarian regimes but its concepts have been borrowed and altered to suit their purposes. The Demiurge is primarily a metaphysical and cosmological figure, and its interpretations have largely remained within the realms of philosophy, theology, and esoteric traditions¹².

However, totalitarian ideologies have drawn on various philosophical and religious concepts to justify their worldviews and actions. For example, certain Gnostic interpretations of the Demiurge depict it as a malevolent or ignorant creator, responsible for the flawed material world². This is the essence of both Nazism’s and Communism’s world view that it is up to them to change the nature of reality itself because they cannot accept the world as it is. This idea of a corrupt or oppressive creator could be metaphorically linked to the way totalitarian regimes view themselves as the ultimate authority, shaping and controlling society according to their own ideals.

Source: Conversation with Copilot, 2024-08-12

(1) THE DEMIURGE IN ANCIENT THOUGHT - Cambridge University Press & Assessment. https://assets.cambridge.org/97811070/75368/frontmatter/9781107075368_frontmatter.pdf.

(2) Chapter 2 The Demiurge and His Place in Plato’s Metaphysics and .... https://brill.com/display/book/9789004504691/BP000003.xml.

(3) The Descent of the Demiurge from Platonism to Gnosticism - Academia.edu.  https://www.academia.edu/3798851/The_Descent_of_the_Demiurge_from_Platonism_to_Gnosticism.  

(4) undefined. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004504691_004.

Totalitarian ideologies often draw on various philosophical and religious concepts to justify their control over society. While the concept of the Demiurge itself hasn't been directly adopted by totalitarian regimes, its underlying themes can be seen in how these ideologies operate.

1. **Control and Order**: The Demiurge in Gnostic traditions is often seen as a controlling force, shaping the material world. Similarly, totalitarian regimes seek to control all aspects of life, imposing strict order and suppressing dissent¹².

2. **Creation of a New Reality**: Just as the Demiurge is seen as creating the physical world, totalitarian regimes often aim to create a new social and political reality. They use propaganda, censorship, and education to shape the beliefs and behaviors of their citizens¹².

3. **Utopian Ideals**: Totalitarian ideologies often promise a utopian future, much like the Demiurge's creation of an ordered cosmos from chaos. This promise is used to justify extreme measures and the suppression of individual freedoms¹².

4. **Centralized Authority**: The Demiurge is a central, authoritative figure in the creation myth. Totalitarian regimes similarly centralize power in a single leader or party, demanding absolute loyalty and obedience¹².

These parallels show how totalitarian ideologies can adopt and adapt philosophical concepts to support their goals.

Source: Conversation with Copilot, 2024-08-12

(1) Totalitarianism | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://iep.utm.edu/totalita/.

(2) Totalitarianism | Definition, Characteristics, Examples, & Facts. https://www.britannica.com/topic/totalitarianism.

(3) Totalitarianism - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism.

(4) Total and Totalitarian Ideologies - Oxford Academic. https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/34324/chapter/291327992.

(5) en.wikipedia.org. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism.

While totalitarian ideologies don't explicitly reference the demiurge, they often adopt a role that mirrors its attributes, especially within the Gnostic framework. Here's how:

Perception of a Flawed World: Totalitarian regimes typically view the existing social, political, and economic order as fundamentally flawed, corrupt, or oppressive. This perspective aligns with the Gnostic view of the material world being inherently defective due to the demiurge's influence.

Promise of Radical Transformation: To address these perceived flaws, totalitarian movements propose a comprehensive reorganization of society. They aim to craft a new world order based on their ideological principles, essentially acting as creators or architects of a redesigned reality. This ambition parallels the demiurge's role as the shaper of the material world.

Claim to Exclusive Knowledge: Scholars like Eric Voegelin have described modern totalitarian movements as exhibiting "gnostic" characteristics. These ideologies often claim to possess exclusive insights or knowledge (gnosis) about the path to a perfected society. This self-ascribed authority justifies their sweeping reforms and the suppression of dissenting views.

Immanentizing the Eschaton: Totalitarian regimes attempt to realize an ultimate, often utopian, state of society within the temporal world—a concept Voegelin termed "immanentizing the eschaton." This endeavor reflects the demiurge's act of bringing form and order to existence, albeit through a flawed lens.

In essence, while totalitarian ideologies don't directly adopt the idea of the demiurge, they embody its thematic elements by positioning themselves as the sole architects capable of redeeming a flawed world. This alignment serves both to legitimize their authority and to mobilize support for their transformative agendas.

The high priests of the Global Cabal:

For the first time in human history global illiberal and authoritarian interests have coalesced into an all powerful and controlling system where NGOs and quangos are dictating to sovereign nations how their citizens must be governed. These entities are responsible for the mishandling of COVID-19 and the lies we were told about the toxic failed inoculant that was created in concert with the virus which resulted in untold injuries to those who have received it. These same NGOs and quangos all use variations of Cultural Marxist Critical Theory to further a cultural revolution which starts with redefining the nature of the nuclear family. Their agenda has successfully broken down the very structures of and foundations for civil society which is why we are currently experiencing such unprecedented levels of civil unrest due to them pursuing a Neo-Marxist utopia which cannot exist.

Multiculturalism is therefore an impossibility since it denies the very nature of the social glue that makes culture itself possible, namely shared ethical values, cultural traditions, and common religious beliefs. The West cannot exist as a project that defends human dignity and freedom without its Christian foundations. Which is why Christianity exists in direct opposition to the goals of these organizations which are creations of the UN.

The UN instead of being a vehicle for international peace and cooperation has become the means for furthering Neo-Marxism.

From: https://learning.candid.org/resources/knowledge-base/ngo-definition-and-role/#:~:text=Non%2Dgovernmental%20organizations%2C%20or%20NGOs,they%20may%20receive%20government%20funding).

"Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) serve as critical players in the modern societal framework, often filling gaps that government bodies and private sectors are unable to address effectively. The role of an NGO in society encompasses a wide range of activities that contribute to social change, community development, and the promotion of civic engagement. In this article, we will explore the multifaceted functions that NGOs perform and how to find NGOs in your area.

What is an NGO?

Non-governmental organizations, or NGOs, were first called such in Article 71 in the Charter of the newly formed United Nations in 1945. While NGOs have no fixed or formal definition, they are generally defined as nonprofit entities independent of governmental influence (although they may receive government funding).

As one can tell from the basic definition above, the difference between nonprofit organizations (NPOs) and NGOs is slim. However, the term "NGO" is not typically applied to U.S.-based nonprofit organizations. Generally, the NGO label is given to organizations operating on an international level although some countries classify their own civil society groups as NGOs.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

One of the primary roles of an NGO is to act as an advocate for social change. NGOs often work towards influencing policies and legislation that affect the communities they serve. By engaging in advocacy work, NGOs raise awareness on critical issues such as human rights, environmental protection, and social justice, striving to bring about systemic change that can improve the lives of people on a larger scale.

Grassroots mobilization

NGOs play a crucial role in mobilizing communities at the grassroots level. They empower individuals by providing them with the knowledge and tools necessary to advocate for their rights and interests. This bottom-up approach ensures that the voices of the marginalized and underrepresented are heard, fostering a society that values inclusivity and diversity.

Humanitarian assistance

In times of crisis, such as natural disasters or conflicts, NGOs are often among the first to respond with humanitarian assistance. They provide essential services including food, shelter, medical care, and psychological support to those affected. NGOs' flexibility and ability to act quickly often make them more efficient than larger, more bureaucratic institutions in delivering aid to those in need.

Community development and empowerment

NGOs are instrumental in community development projects that aim to improve the quality of life for individuals and groups. These projects may include building schools, improving healthcare facilities, and providing vocational training to enhance employment opportunities. By focusing on empowerment, NGOs help communities to become self-reliant and sustainable in the long term.

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

NGOs contribute significantly to the achievement of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These 17 goals aim to address global challenges such as poverty, inequality, climate change, and peace. NGOs often tailor their projects and initiatives to align with one or more of these goals, thereby contributing to a global effort towards sustainable development.

Education and capacity building

Education is a cornerstone of NGO activities. Many organizations focus on providing educational opportunities to children and adults alike, helping to reduce illiteracy rates and equipping individuals with the skills needed to participate fully in society. Through capacity-building workshops, NGOs also strengthen the abilities of other civil society organizations, enhancing their impact and efficiency.

How can I find an NGO in my area?

Navigating the vast landscape of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) can be a daunting task. Enter Candid, the world's largest source of comprehensive information on NGOs. Whether you're a philanthropist, a researcher, or simply interested in the nonprofit sector, Candid is your first stop to accessing NGO's in your area.”

My summation:

The hive mind shared by these organizations represents a set of orthodoxies that demand compliance to their doctrines under pain of being labelled a heretic. These bodies have placed every legislative assembly throughout the developed west under their direct influence and woe betide any sovereign nation who dare to govern itself under its own laws, particularly if those laws are founded on Christian ethics and Biblical morality. The very reason that the average person cannot comprehend their agenda is that its Gnostic secrets are known only to its high priests. Those who long to share is such mysteries are only permitted to enter behind the veil by means of blind obedience. To the sane mind this enigma is hidden in cognitive dissonance if one were to attempt to accept the mutually exclusive nonsense of Hegelian anti-reason of thesis then antithesis onto synthesis. Here is how it works. Thesis, two plus two equals four. Antithesis, two plus two equals five. Synthesis, two plus two equals four and/or five depending on the whims of the high priests. This is how willing the priests of the gnostic cult have become to accept something which the average person simply cannot grasp. And this universalism has replaced Christianity. You may think that is a good thing, but you would be a fool if you do since every single authoritarian regime was based upon gnostic mysticism and Hegelian thinking.

The early church took several measures to counter the threat of Gnosticism and other false ideologies:

1. **Establishing Canonical Scriptures**: The church worked to establish a canon of authoritative scriptures. By recognizing certain texts as inspired and authoritative, the church provided a clear standard for doctrine and practice. This helped to counter the diverse and often contradictory texts promoted by Gnostic groups.

2. **Creeds and Confessions**: The early church formulated creeds and confessions of faith, such as the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed. These concise statements of core Christian beliefs helped to unify the church around a common set of doctrines and provided a clear standard against which to measure other teachings.

3. **Church Councils**: The church convened councils, such as the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, to address theological disputes and heresies. These councils brought together bishops and other church leaders to discuss and resolve issues, leading to the formal condemnation of Gnostic teachings and the affirmation of orthodox Christian doctrine.

4. **Apologetics and Theological Writings**: Early Christian apologists and theologians, such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen, wrote extensively to refute Gnostic teachings and defend + Christianity. Their writings provided intellectual and theological arguments against Gnosticism and helped to educate and strengthen the faith of believers.

5. **Pastoral Care and Discipleship**: Church leaders emphasized pastoral care and discipleship to ensure that believers were well-grounded in their faith. By teaching sound doctrine and providing spiritual guidance, pastors and bishops helped to protect their congregations from the influence of false teachings.

Through these efforts, the early church was able to counter the threat of Gnosticism and other false ideologies, maintaining the integrity and unity of the Christian faith. If we are to have any hope at all of restoring Godly order and the freedom which is to be found in Christ alone, we must do the same! This is a call to action to all who share my hope in a living and resurrected Saviour for without Christ as King of every earthly government we are doomed to live in oppressive murderous tyranny despite all the idiotic utopian promises of the Gnostic fools who are busily deconstructing what has taken two millennia to build.

Secularism cannot replace Christianity

 

Let me begin with the following admonitions which ought to set up todays vodcast nicely. It will also serve to sort the wheat fro the chaff as it were since many of you will listen no further!

Psalm 14:1 “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.”

Deuteronomy 32:18 - “You neglected the Rock who begot you, And forgot the God who gave you birth.”

Jeremiah 6:10 - “To whom shall I speak and give warning That they may hear? Behold, their ears are closed And they cannot listen. Behold, the word of the Lord has become a reproach to them; They have no delight in it.”

Jeremiah 8:9 - “The wise men are put to shame, They are dismayed and caught; Behold, they have rejected the word of the Lord, And what kind of wisdom do they have?”

My thoughts on the abattoir in Southport and the radical Marxist agenda that made it possible:

Regarding the brutal Satanic butchering of three innocent children by Axel Muganwa Rudakubana where three children were hacked to death, two of them, aged six and seven years, died on Monday, the third, a girl aged nine years, died Tuesday morning as a result of injuries sustained during the knife attack, Merseyside Police said in a statement. Eight other children were injured, five of them critically. Two adults were also injured while trying to protect the children and are also in critical condition, according to the police. This tragic incident in Southport which involved girls who were attending a Taylor Swift-themed dance class at The Hart Space community centre. The heinous slaughter of Bebe King, Elsie Dot Stancombe, and Alice Dasilva Aguiar provides further proof that unchecked immigration from war torn countries is the actual issue we are facing in the West. And behind these immigration policies lies a Neo-Marxist agenda known as Critical Race Theory. Any thinking person is forced to conclude what I have been stating for well over a decade is factual, that murderous medieval cultures are completely at odds with Western Christian values.

So obviously the question remains as to what motivated what became an abattoir in a dance class? My answer is that it matters little, punishment and law enforcement however do matter. And the outrage of the British people matters! We are witnessing an opprobrium which is boiling over into the streets even as Starmer’s Stasi proclaim that the “far right” is the real problem.

Axel Muganwa Rudakubana was named as the murderer on Monday. He was raised by Rwandans who came to Britain in the nineties. The specific circumstances of why they came are still unknown to the public, but it is connected to the 1994 Rwandan genocide, in which somewhere between 600,000 and 800,000 Tutsis were slaughtered in 100 days of unimaginable savagery, much of it committed with machetes and other cutting weapons. Many people, understandably, asked if the killer was a convert to radical Islam; after all, the nature of the murders had all the hallmarks of an Islamic terror attack. That seems less likely now, especially as Rwanda is majority Christian, and Rudakubana is not a Muslim name. But here’s another theory, was he radicalised, or inspired if you prefer, by stories of what happened in Rwanda?

Now as to Critical Race Theory and its affect on civil society

Critical Race Theory has led Great Britian and many other Western countries into a two-tiered system of law enforcement where if you’re are considered by the authorities as a member of the under-class you will be given preferential treatment under the law. Cultural Marxist Critical Race Theory is leading to the death and murder of innocents and the nation raging in opposition to an ideology which has divided society into an us versus them mentality. Despite the authorities mischaracterizing the protestors, the majority of folks at the London protest of July 31^st were not in any way violent rather its leaders’ shouted Christ is King while calling for solidarity and calm. You should not be feeling unsafe in our motherland was the theme promoted by the protest’s leaders. I assure you when people declare in unison that Christ is King in opposition to their corrupt Neo-Marxist leaders who have perverted Britain into an aberration of its Christian heritage while promoting CRT then God Himself will move heaven and earth to stop their Cultural Marxist march through our sacred institutions! Watch for yourselves live footage from the protest to see the police acting as enforcers of the state’s radical agenda: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0X4uPjcEsE

As to the origin of Critical Race Theory (CRT). CRT is an interdisciplinary academic field that originated in the mid-1970s. It was developed by several American legal scholars, including Derrick Bell, Alan Freeman, and Kimberlé Crenshaw, among others¹². CRT examines the ways in which race and racism intersect with other forms of social stratification, such as class, gender, and disability¹.

The theory emerged as a response to what its founders saw as the limitations of the civil rights movement and traditional legal approaches to addressing racial inequalities¹². It draws from critical theory and critical legal studies, and it challenges the idea that the law is neutral and objective¹².

Source: Conversation with Copilot, 2024-08-03

(1) Critical race theory - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory.

(2) Critical race theory (CRT) | Definition, Principles, & Facts. https://www.britannica.com/topic/critical-race-theory.

(3) Critical race theory: the concept dividing the US - BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57908808.

The entire point of these social engineers is that the Cultural Marxist social revolution is never ending. Its entire purpose is to be an ongoing process of self deprecation which actually never intends to achieve its ends since social revolution is their goal.

Critical Race Theory (CRT) and critical multiculturalism are often promoted together because they share common goals and principles. Both frameworks aim to address and dismantle systemic inequities and biases in society, particularly those related to race, class, and gender.

**Critical Race Theory** focuses on understanding and challenging the ways in which race and racism intersect with other forms of social stratification to create and maintain inequality¹. It emphasizes that racism is not just an individual bias but is embedded in legal systems, policies, and institutions.

**Critical Multiculturalism**, on the other hand, seeks to highlight and address structural inequities across various dimensions, including race, class, and gender, to promote a more equitable distribution of power and resources³. It goes beyond celebrating cultural diversity to critically examine and challenge the power dynamics that marginalize certain groups.

The promotion of both CRT and critical multiculturalism by the same advocates is often due to their shared commitment to social justice and equity. By integrating these frameworks, educators, policymakers, and activists aim to create more inclusive and equitable environments in schools, workplaces, and communities²³.

Source: Conversation with Copilot, 8/3/2024

(1) The State of Critical Race Theory in Education. https://www.gse.harvard.edu/ideas/edcast/22/02/state-critical-race-theory-education.

(2) Critical multiculturalism — Beautiful Trouble. https://beautifultrouble.org/toolbox/tool/critical-multiculturalism.

(3) Critical Multiculturalism | Theory and Praxis | Stephen May, Christine. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.4324/9780203858059/critical-multiculturalism-stephen-may-christine-sleeter.

(4) Reconciling Multiculturalism from a Critical Race Perspective. https://www.ship.edu/globalassets/proteus/volume24.2-31-hairston.pdf.

(5) Introduction: Critical Race Theory in Education: Theory, Praxis, and .... https://www.jstor.org/stable/42978078.

(6) undefined. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203858059.

How Europe lost faith in multiculturalism

A nuanced history of an often simplistic debate argues against ‘muscular liberalism’

By Malise Ruthven published on August 24 2017

https://www.ft.com/content/dd122a8c-8720-11e7-8bb1-5ba57d47eff7

“In October 2010 Angela Merkel, leader of Europe’s most powerful country, made a ringing declaration: “The multicultural concept is a failure, an absolute failure.” Four months later, Britain’s then prime minister, David Cameron, endorsed her approach, calling for “a lot less of the passive tolerance of recent years and much more active, muscular liberalism”. Within days France’s then president, Nicolas Sarkozy, had joined the chorus, suggesting on television that “we’ve been too concerned about the identity of new arrivals and not enough about the identity of the country receiving them”. This last intervention, as historian Rita Chin points out in her lucid and erudite overview of the debate, was somewhat surprising, given that “over many decades France had explicitly refused to consider multiculturalism as a guiding principle”.

While referring to Islamist terrorist atrocities in Paris, Brussels and Berlin, Chin’s The Crisis of Multiculturalism in Europe went to press too soon to note that during the election campaign that won him the presidency this year, France’s Emmanuel Macron enraged his rightwing critics by apologising for the “crime” of colonialism in Algeria, indicating that his government would seek to “help with Muslim integration”.

“Integration”, of course, may run contrary to the multicultural idea. The Nationality Commission set up by Jacques Chirac as French prime minister in 1987 sought the “national integration” of Algerian and other non-European incomers according to a historical pattern by which regional minorities such as Bretons, Corsicans or Occitans were transformed into modern citizens sharing common characteristics — as historian Eugen Weber famously put it, turning “peasants into Frenchmen”.

Central to this is the idea of laïcité, a word usually translated as “secularism” but with stronger ideological connotations. As Chin notes, the French term conveys an ideal of church-state separation designed not so much to ensure the protection of an individual’s religious beliefs (as in the US) but to secure their “full allegiance to the state by counter-acting religious prejudice”. Full allegiance demands a ban on “ostentatious” symbols of religious affiliation such as large crosses, kippahs and, above all, the “Muslim” headscarf.

In her survey of the complex and sometimes bizarre arguments surrounding the question of the foulard, as banned for girls in state schools, Chin shows how French commentators on both right and left tend to view the headscarf as a symbol of patriarchal oppression, while ignoring the possibility that for some wearers, at least, it may be a demonstration of self-empowerment.

In contrast to France, both Britain and Germany adopted positive approaches to multiculturalism — a trend that now appears to be in retreat. Given their legal status as Commonwealth subjects, most of the ex-colonials who arrived in the UK after the second world war were formally entitled to the same rights as others, a factor that Chin suggests made “immigrants in Britain somewhat bolder in their critiques and more efficacious in their demands” than their French and German counterparts, enabling them to take a more “active role in shaping the way diversity was managed”.

A turning point came with the Rushdie affair in the 1990s. The protests against The Satanic Verses — the novel in which Salman Rushdie was accused of lampooning the Prophet Mohammed — “dramatically transformed” immigration politics in Britain, shifting the focus of calls for greater integration from Afro-Caribbeans to Asian Muslims, who were “suspected of introducing religious fundamentalism and violence into a tolerant liberal polity”. Chin suggests that by re-casting the debate on immigration in terms of “liberal values”, British commentators subtly placed Rushdie’s immigrant critics outside the bounds of the British cultural consensus.

Initially West Germany’s approach was different, with the guest-worker programme regarded as a win-win means of building the postwar economy while shedding the Nazi legacy. However, the new conception of “culture” by which ministers could laud “the rapprochement between persons of highly diverse backgrounds and cultures” betrayed “an underlying sense of essential, unchanging difference”. Viewed in this light, the multicultural mantra was a clever way of hiding the ethnically determined basis of German identity.

But is multiculturalism really dead, or are rumours of its demise premature? Chin’s account of non-occidental immigration to leading western European countries since the second world war (focusing primarily on Britain, France and Germany, with sideways glances at Switzerland and the Netherlands) does a good job by setting out the terms in which the debate has been conducted. Her conclusion is sensible, if nuanced: “What a historical perspective makes clear is that we need to uphold both liberal conceptions of individual freedom and pluralistic communitarianism”, with each acting as a check on the other.”

Here we can clearly see that the authorities understood CRT and its Multiculturalist agenda were not working yet since these policies weren’t working and conflicted with their Cultural Marxist agenda the going cultural Marxist Revolution had to trump the obvious and blatant failures of CRT and Multiculturalism. Keir Starmer has simply further radicalized this process in Britain. He is committed to pursuing a murderous Neo-Marxist agenda which can only result in further violence from immigrant communities which has created a potential powder keg of explosive counter-revolution from the British people whom he labels as “far-right” for wanting to live under a Rule of Law which applies equally to all.

So, what does Keir Starmer actually want? The UK’s new Labour prime minister is usually described as moderate, pragmatic and non-ideological. Here, historian and broadcaster David Starkey argues that this is an illusion. Starmer, Starkey explains, is a fierce anti-democrat. He wants to transfer power from the UK’s elected parliament to unelected bodies, from the courts to the civil service to the quangos. His party will establish the supremacy of the ‘Blob’, all while cracking down hard on free speech. Our democracy and liberty are in peril. Watch, share and be sure to subscribe to our YouTube channel. Listen to Dr. Starkey’s assessment at this link: https://youtu.be/srz2JRNxVg0?si=irfuvegIPpViv5Xb

My final thoughts:

Secularism cannot replace Christianity. Every single principle of individual dignity and liberty flows from our faith in Christ. We will witness the fulfillment of Jeremiah 8:9 where wise men will be put to shame, dismayed and caught, since they have rejected the word of the Lord! For what kind of wisdom do they have when their wisdom has resulted in the slaughter of innocents? Christ is indeed King. Let us loudly declare it for then and only then will we see limited constitutional government under the Rule of Law restored.