How We Arrived At Insane

                      “Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.”  

                       -Greek Antiquity

For years now, people who have some sort of desire for virtuous living, traditional moral values, a desire to uphold a Christian belief system, and maintain the rule of law, have watched the systemic eradication of all of the above in western civilization.  How did this happen in a brief amount of time?  Historians Will and Ariel Durant in the Story of Civilization said that great civilizations commit suicide by dying from within, not invasion from without.  This principle also applies to the Church.  We are watching the auto demolition of the Church with a stealth agenda from within, working to bring the Church in a new direction to a one world government, a one world currency, and one world ruler.  If people cannot recognize it for what it is now, they simply haven’t been paying attention.  Or worse, they deny its reality.

Many in the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church have been directly complicit behind the scenes aiding and abetting this agenda to a trusting, yet unsuspecting and gullible public.  Faithful Catholics never would have dreamed clergy they admired, trusted, and respected, sold them out for a socialist agenda.  Adopting the principles of Antonio Gramsci and Saul Alinsky, and using the strategy of infiltration from within for a socialist agenda, has ben their modus operandi.  The National Education Association (NEA) in concert with liberal clergy has been the heart and soul of the democratic party for several generations.  This method of control has been perfected by liberal and socialist leaders in the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church.  Jesus Himself addressed this on numerous occasions when he spoke about the lawgivers of His time,  “I am sending you out as sheep among wolves” (Matt. 10:6).  The most insidious enemy is the one within, and they are barbarians inside the gates. 

What we are experiencing is nothing new for the world, but what is new is the drive to socialism hasn’t been this ferocious in the United States since the Great Depression.  Through a group of men led by Frank Buchman of Moral Rearmament  (founder of the Oxford Group) using plays with Christian themes, the drive to communism was beaten into submission and people saw the lie of socialism/communism out in the open.   The lumber camps around Seattle Washington is where Buchman first had his plays, as the area was precariously close to communist rule in the 1930’s.  The desire for the collective of Hegel, Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin and Mao, and many other nations throughout the world like Venezuela is at full throttle.  The drive to socialism has now reared its ugly head again, this time with a vengeance, and now with a global blueprint that is well funded and well organized.

Socialism, if not curbed of its voracious appetite to have state control of people and industry, leads to collective communism.  Revolutions are the norm in history when there is an imbalance in justice with unbridled capitalism— the only question is when does a spark ignite a blaze.  Socialism is the slow but steady march to a communist godless state.  It is a linear line from one to the other.   Yet, those who propose its ideology cannot point to a single success where its ideology works for the benefit of all, as it only shares the spoils with a few at the top.  In time the leadership siphons off the largesse of the state as fast as they can, for as much as they can.

As much as the philosophy of Ayn Rand’s Objectivism is fatally flawed (heretical and anti Christian) due to her atheism and lack of acknowledgment of God in the Divine Plan of mankind.  However, she got it right on collectivism, and this is one element for her widespread appeal to this day.  The evil of collectivism is about all she did get right, as her philosophy is for college freshman who don’t have the intellectual resources to think more broadly about the role of government, the state, and the individual, and how God designed them to interact.  Rand had seen the Bolsheviik Revolution as a young girl in Russia and the Ukraine, and knew violence would precede the move from socialism to communism.   As a result, she fled Russia and moved to New York.

Some of the most accurate and descriptive writings on how a nation evolves to socialism come from a French economist, philosopher, statesman, and writer by the name of Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850).   After the French Revolution of 1789, there was nothing but economic and political turmoil as hundreds of years of rule by the French Monarchy came to an end.  Chaos ensued, and death was nearby for all who opposed the new system of governance under the Reign of Terror.  The experiment of liberty, equality, and fraternity was untried in France as it never had lived under self-rule.  The transition from monarchy to democracy was violent.  To correct the wrongs of the Sun Kings and the Monarchy, the people revolted, and by the Revolution of 1848, France had installed a socialist government.  This period was when Bastiat was in his intellectual prime writing about what he saw during this sixty-year transition phase. 

Bastiat wrote on matters of state and economics, but most of his best writing was in a book called, The Law, The State, and Other Political Writings.  It is a series of his essays from 1843 until his death in 1850.  The phase of America and the West from the 1960s to today has many similarities to that transitional period in France. 

Bastiat writes about the march towards socialism in his essay called, Baccalaureate and Socialism.  Bastiat writes,  “Plato was the constructor of imaginary republics that were to serve as models for future teachers of peoples and fathers of nations. 

Whoever, not knowing the social body is a set of natural laws, like the human body, dreams of creating an artificial form of society, and sets out to manipulate the family, property, rights, and humanity to suit his will, is a socialist.  He is not engaging in physiology but statuary.  He does not observe; he invents.  He does not believe in God but himself.  He is not a scholar; but a tyrant.  He is not serving mankind; he is making use of it.  He is not studying its nature; he is changing it in accordance with Rousseau’s advice.  He is drawing inspiration from antiquity and following on from Lycurgus and Plato.  And, to sum it up, he has certainly obtained his baccalaureate(page 193).  

Bastiat’s thesis is that when the state controls the narrative on education, it will inevitably lead to socialism because compliance with the state is necessary for funding.  The state dictates what is taught because funding is provided by the state.  The state promotes the state. In other words, you don’t bite the hand that feeds you, and the state doesn’t work against itself.   Plato’s Utopia was the ideal for a society with a working class, a ruling class, and a military class. This philosophy is like communism.  It works in a classroom, but it just doesn’t work on the street, the home, the Church, or in industry.  It is an ideal that man has pursued, but is in direct conflict with sin and human nature, therefore, is always doomed from the start.  No one can point to a socialist society that ever functioned as these atheist idealists hoped. 

Rousseau (1712-1778) was a prolific writer who had an enormous contribution to the Age of Enlightenment pre and post the French Revolution, and the intellectual foundation for France and Western Civilization.  Radical political philosophers like Rousseau soften the beachhead for soon to arrive political tyrants. 

All who majored in history and the liberal arts know Rousseau’s thinking, and his adverse foundational flaws have impacted philosophical thought that has rippled into classrooms to this day. We ended up here in this modern day dystopia because of men like him.  

The liberal, the progressive, the ungodly, and the unbeliever have an agenda to:   

  1. Eliminate Christianity and see Christianity not as the solution, but the problem;
  2. This is the old age humanistic solution that dates back to the book of Jeremiah 2:20, when Satan said, “I will not serve” and deny the influence and the reality Satan exists, thus denying sin;
  3. It is not neutral towards God, it is anti God, they deny God exists, and do not want His presence in the market square;
  4. Denies the belief in Original Sin;
  5. Doesn’t understand a utopia cannot work because of the horrible potential of sinful human nature, and wants the State to provide it;
  6. Is not personally committed to sacrifice or self donation, and wants the State and others to do what they won’t because of laziness and selfishness;
  7. Desires the collective of Marxism, socialism, and communism, but once achieved, it becomes totalitarian and severely oppressive to dissenters and previous supporters;
  8. It is all about diversity if you are on their agenda and platform.  If you dissent from them, you are a bigot and intolerant, and in a short amount of time, a political enemy of the state;
  9. They are unbelievers looking to take as much as they can, and contributing as little as possible;
  10. They wish to piggy-back on the labor of others so they can promote equality, but do less work themselves;
  11. They deny the reality of Scripture and the supremacy of an all loving God, but reject that it has been sin that alienates man from God (Isaiah 59:2);
  12. It is a humanist manifesto at its finest;
  13. It is a reactionary remedy that is not sustainable, and breeds class warfare and violence;
  14. Programs are invented that are illogical and have no sustainability in the short or long term.

Bastiat said:

Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state.  They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone.

Government is a great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everyone else.

When goods do not cross borders, soldiers will.   

Writers note: This implies it is fair trade.  The USA has not had fair trade with China and other nations due to corrupt U.S politicians being played by foreign governments gaming the system.  All the while they prosper personally at the expense of the American worker.