Category Archives: Culture

Weekly Watchman for 02/17/2017

Fake News and Christian Discernment
Charles Spurgeon once rightly said, “Discernment is not a matter of simply telling the difference between right and wrong; rather it is telling the difference between right and almost right.” Today, Pastor Randy White joins us to discuss discernment, fake news, and having the correct biblical perspective on our times and how to prepare for the challenging days our nation and church face.

Read more


The Most Important Nation in History
God has brought the nation of Israel back to center stage for the final years of this world before the Lord returns in judgment. Of all the policy decisions President Trump is faced with, none may be more important than how he works with and supports Israel. Joining us to discuss the critical relationship between the U.S. and Israel is Jan Markell of Olive Tree Views.

Read more


Lies, Hypocrisy and Cover-ups from the Left
There can be little doubt that the secular media in our nation on the whole is committed to the Socialist progressive movement, and the days of unbiased reporting of news is a thing of the past. Today we discuss the death of media objectivity; has the final nail been hammered in its coffin?

This morning, Mike and Dave discuss a report on how “climate change” data has been manipulated to advance radical environmentalism, and take a look at the hypocrisy of Senate Democrats in the handling of President Trump’s cabinet nominations. We will also look at the increasing pressure progressives are putting on American businesses to get in line with their agenda.

Plus, is media objectivity dead? Sadly, truth and facts are no longer priorities when political ideology reigns supreme.

Read more


A Lost Generation?
Certainly this generation faces enormous challenges as public education and media have succeeded at indoctrinating many of them into a secular humanist world view. And this generation of younger people will one day lead our nation and our churches; some already are! So how can we help them turn (back) to God instead of away from Him? Religion and Culture expert, Dr. Alex McFarland joins us today to discuss this and other concerns.

Read more


The World Will Hate You, But…
Jesus warned His disciples in John 15 that because the world hated Him, it would also hate all those who believe in and follow Him as well. The times in which we live certainly bear out the truth of Jesus’ warning. But if we are not speaking God’s truth and living out the Bible, people may not know we are Christians.

Led by atheists, LBGTQ activists, a corrupt humanist court system, and a corrupt media, our nation is seeing a steady diet of lawsuits against the free speech of Christian individuals and organizations. Religious freedoms are being redefined.

This morning we cover some recent stories involving the godless push to eradicate biblical Christian morality in America, and we analyze some of the evidence of growing hatred and discrimination against Christians. Our special guest today is Brad Dacus, president of The Pacific Justice Institute.

Read more


Technology, the Church, World Events & Prophecy
It’s vital for true believers to have a solid, biblical Christian worldview and do our best to see people and events with an eternal perspective. Though we were not given a spirit of fear, it’s easy to become anxious or overwhelmed if we focus on this world rather than the Word.

Read more

Observation: Astronomical Growth of “People Control” Laws, Rules and Regulations

In recent years, there has been a rapid proliferation of thousands of new laws, rules, and regulations in America – 99.9% of which you have never heard or been informed of. They are about “people control,” and, in all likelihood, you are in violation of at least a dozen or more right now and don’t even know it. In short, while trying your best to live a simple, law-abiding life as a good citizen – as you always have – you are now most probably a criminal felon facing at some point either heavy fines or possibly even imprisonment. How does it feel to know that you are now (or will soon be) a criminal? Welcome to life in the rapidly emerging American socialist gulag.

Recently, privacy expert Mark Nestmann wrote the following about this trend and what some people are doing to try and protect themselves: Do you own a dog? You could face six months in federal prison if you walk it on federal lands on a leash longer than six feet in length. Do you have a bank account? If you deposit or withdraw more than $10,000 in cash over multiple transactions, you could be imprisoned for up to five years. You could also lose every penny in the account, under the theory it “facilitated” your crime as a “money launderer.” Do you have foreign investments? If you neglect to tell Uncle Sam about them, you could face draconian penalties. Forget to file just one form? You could face a $10,000 penalty per account per year.

There’s no requirement that you know any of these crimes exist for you to be found guilty of violating them. After all, “ignorance of the law is no excuse.” Given that fact, you might think that Uncle Sam would make it easy to understand exactly what’s legal and what’s not. Think again. In 1790, the first set of federal criminal laws contained a grand total of 20 crimes. Since then, the number of federal crimes listed has grown like a cancer. No one knows how many federal crimes exist, although a 1998 study from the American Bar Association concluded the total was likely “much higher” than 3,000. Today, it would have to exceed 4,000-5,000.

That’s just the tip of the iceberg. There’s a little-known and poorly understood process that federal agencies undertake to literally make law. In some cases, if you violate an “administrative law” a federal agency creates out of thin air, you can be imprisoned. Indeed, the number of federal regulations carrying criminal penalties may be as high as 300,000. Ponder that number!

(Excerpt from McAlvany Intelligence Advisor, September 2016)

Why I Won’t Be Seeing (or Reviewing) The Shack Movie

The day The Shack sold its hundred thousandth copy, it became likely there would be a movie adaption. The day it sold its millionth, it became practically guaranteed. And, sure enough, it comes to theaters March 3, starring Sam Worthington, Octavia Spencer, and Tim McGraw.

For some time, I have been considering whether I should see and review it. I am quite sure that watching and reviewing The Shack would prove to be a wise business decision. I could get to an early screening, write up a review, and see a nice bump in my site’s traffic. Pageviews are the currency of the Internet and as a blogger I am supposed to base my decisions on what will maximize them. Even better, watching and reviewing The Shackcould be genuinely helpful to others. That is especially true if the movie proves to be as deeply flawed as the book. A review might serve to equip people to watch it with discernment or even to avoid watching it altogether.

However, I am far more sure that watching and reviewing The Shack would be an unwise and even sinful spiritual decision. For that reason I will not be seeing or reviewing The Shack. Let me explain why.

Read more

‘Tesla’ Creator Billionaire Elon Musk Says ‘Humans Must Merge With Machines’ To Survive

Billionaire Elon Musk is known for his futuristic ideas and his latest suggestion might just save us from being irrelevant as artificial intelligence (AI) grows more prominent.

The Tesla and SpaceX CEO said on Monday that humans need to merge with machines to become a sort of cyborg.

“Over time I think we will probably see a closer merger of biological intelligence and digital intelligence,” Musk told an audience at the World Government Summit in Dubai, where he also launched Tesla in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

“It’s mostly about the bandwidth, the speed of the connection between your brain and the digital version of yourself, particularly output.”

Musk explained what he meant by saying that computers can communicate at “a trillion bits per second”, while humans, whose main communication method is typing with their fingers via a mobile device, can do about 10 bits per second.

In an age when AI threatens to become widespread, humans would be useless, so there’s a need to merge with machines, according to Musk.

“Some high bandwidth interface to the brain will be something that helps achieve a symbiosis between human and machine intelligence and maybe solves the control problem and the usefulness problem,” Musk explained.

The technologists proposal would see a new layer of a brain able to access information quickly and tap into artificial intelligence. It’s not the first time Musk has spoken about the need for humans to evolve, but it’s a constant theme of his talks on how society can deal with the disruptive threat of AI.

‘Very quick’ disruption

During his talk, Musk touched upon his fear of “deep AI” which goes beyond driverless cars to what he called “artificial general intelligence”. This he described as AI that is “smarter than the smartest human on earth” and called it a “dangerous situation”.

While this might be some way off, the Tesla boss said the more immediate threat is how AI, particularly autonomous cars, which his own firm is developing, will displace jobs. He said the disruption to people whose job it is to drive will take place over the next 20 years, after which 12 to 15 percent of the global workforce will be unemployed.

“The most near term impact from a technology standpoint is autonomous cars … That is going to happen much faster than people realize and it’s going to be a great convenience,” Musk said.

“But there are many people whose jobs are to drive. In fact I think it might be the single largest employer of people … Driving in various forms. So we need to figure out new roles for what do those people do, but it will be very disruptive and very quick.” source

Source: ‘Tesla’ Creator Billionaire Elon Musk Says ‘Humans Must Merge With Machines’ To Survive

We Live In A Society Where ‘Fifty Shades’, Beyonce And Lady Gaga Are Considered To Be ‘Entertainment’

Fifty Shades Darker - Movie PosterWhat in the world has happened to America? We live in a society where perversion, sexual violence and occult rituals have become essential elements of our entertainment. In fact, these days it seems like we can’t get through a major awards show or a Super Bowl halftime celebration without being forced to see things that would have been absolutely unthinkable in this country just fifty years ago. Unfortunately, most Americans have already had their consciences seared so badly that these things don’t even bother them anymore. (Read More…)

Defending Christianity in Modern America

by Michael I. Kaplan

Faithful Christians are under spiritual and physical assault in our modern world, and their challenges are greater than at any other time in recent history.

Hostile religions, anti-faith ideology and politically correct governments are literally trying to destroy Christianity at its core. Concurrently, activists pursuing an anti-God agenda are attempting to rewrite the moral and ethical systems of our Western culture.

The doctrine of the “separation of Church and State” has evolved into “Suppression of Church and Secularism of State,” and contemporary Christians in the Body of Christ appear unprepared to stop the momentum of this movement.

If you were of the world, the world would love its own.

Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you

out of the world, therefore the world hates you.

~ John 15:19 ~

The external challenges faced by Christians aren’t limited to threats outside the faith; factions within the Body of Christ are having negative impacts as well. In a May 2016 interview with the Vatican’s official news publication, La Croix, Pope Francis made the following statement in response to the reporter’s question regarding Islamic terrorism:

Today, I don’t think that there is a fear of Islam as such but of ISIS and its war of conquest, which is partly drawn from Islam. It is true that the idea of conquest is inherent in the soul of Islam. However, it is also possible to interpret the objective in Matthew’s Gospel, where Jesus sends his disciples to all nations, in terms of the same idea of conquest (emphasis added).

The Pope, whether intentionally or unintentionally, claims a moral equivalency exists between Christ’s Great Commission and the Islamic Terrorist’s goals of conquering Western culture and establishing an Islamic Caliphate. According to those words, a group of students sharing the Gospel at a university is similar to radicalized men in black hoods, beheading non-believers on international television.

One of the solutions to this dilemma is training Christians in the art and skill of Apologetics. Christian Apologetics (ἀπολογία / apologesia) is a discipline of Christian theology that presents reasoned and evidential arguments for Christianity, defending it against objections. Why should Christians have an interest in this discipline? Because God’s Word, the Bible, commands it…

The Poached Egg ApologeticsFOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>>

Michael I. Kaplan: Defending Christianity in Modern America

Reading, Writing, and Revolution on Our College Campuses

LifeZette reports:

It’s official: Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, is jumping on the anti-Trump bandwagon, sponsoring a workshop to train students in activism against the new president and his administration.

Parents of students who attend should certainly know their tuition money is going toward this endeavor, which is sponsored by the university’s program in gender, sexuality, and feminist studies.

One 1973 Duke graduate is saddened by the university’s out-and-out commitment to progressive ideals. “Founded by Methodists and Quakers, this university was supposed to offer the best education possible for young minds,” the Charlotte, North Carolina, resident told LifeZette. “I often wonder what they [the founders] would think about the knee-jerk activism and total hysteria going on today.”

View article →

The battle lines are drawn in the White House between religious liberty and LGBT rights

Denny Burk, Professor of Biblical Studies at Boyce College, has a warning for people of faith:

There is a controversy brewing in the White House that religious voters had better start paying attention to. As I wrote yesterday, there is one faction that wants to keep President Obama’s 2014 LGBT executive order in place, and there is another faction that wants to oppose it with an executive order protecting religious liberty. Politico reports today about who is leading the factions and where this conflict is going:

Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump helped lead the charge to scuttle a draft executive order that would have overturned Obama-era enforcements of LGBT rights in the workplace, multiple sources with knowledge of the situation told POLITICO.

A draft executive order on LGBT rights — which outlines how to roll back former president Barack Obama’s protections and expand legal exemptions based on religious beliefs — has been circulating among journalists and worried progressive groups this week.

But two sources close to Kushner and Ivanka Trump, who have in the past been supporters of gay rights, said the young couple were both in favor of putting out a clear statement from the president, promising to uphold the 2014 Obama executive order and stopping the momentum for the turnaround in its tracks.

View article →

Evangelicals and Trump’s Promise to “Destroy” the Johnson Amendment

microphone-1454779675zri

At yesterday’s National Prayer Breakfast, President Donald Trump said, “I will get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution. I will do that. Remember.”

The 1954 amendment introduced by former Senator and President Lyndon B. Johnson bans all 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations—which includes churches and parachurch ministries—from endorsing candidates or participating in political campaigns as an institution or risk losing their tax exempt status.

Members of Congress have already moved to introduce legislation reversing the Johnson Amendment. The Free Speech Fairness Act is thought by many conservative lawmakers and Evangelical leaders to be a fair remedy the to free speech infringements imposed by the Johnson Amendment.

“I am grateful to President Trump for raising this issue to prominence over the last year,” responded Dr. Jerry Johnson, president of the National Religious Broadcasters, in a press statement. “For too long the infamous Johnson Amendment has dangled like a sword above the heads of pastors and ministry leaders, chilling their constitutional free speech rights.”

Hernan Castano pastors a minority church affected by a 2014 subpoena by the city of Houston demanding sermons dealing with homosexuality be turned over for review. As the Christian Post reports, Castano also lends his support to President Trump’s promise to “totally destroy” the Johnson Amendment.

“We need to repeal the Johnson Amendment because I have seen the faces of pastors, not only the pastors of big congregations but the pastors of smaller congregations,” Costano said. “I have seen the fear of their heart holding them back from speaking truth and I have seen them hold back from what will make a difference for their own people because they do not want the doors of their church buildings closed or their 501(c)(3) removed.”

Richard Land, president of Southern Evangelical Seminary, has previously denounced the Johnson Amendment as a political tool used by secular organizations like the ACLU to “intimidate and silence pastors and churches in addressing the political issues, which often have deeply moral components that face our nation.”

However, Land is cautious in his approach. “I personally don’t believe that churches should be endorsing candidates for office. Instead, we should be looking for candidates that endorse us, our values, our beliefs, our convictions.”

The constitutionality of the Johnson Amendment is debated as a violation of the First Amendment’s Free Speech and Exercise clauses as well as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. As such, Dr. Land believes decisions of political engagement should be “made by the church and the pastor” and “not one that is coerced or mandated by the government.”

Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, has argued along the same lines as Land. “While I don’t think a church normally should endorse candidates for office from the pulpit,” stated Moore previously, “Such decisions shouldn’t be dictated by bureaucrats at the IRS or anywhere else. That’s why I support the freedom of speech for churches and pastors, even when they say more or less than what I would say from the pulpit.”

Indeed, I too do not want to see my pastor or church collectively endorse candidates or support particular political campaigns. But yesterday my Methodist colleague Mark Tooley offered historical warnings for why Evangelicals should err on the side of caution in this debate.

Tooley, president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy and a life-long Methodist, offered a fresh reminder that neither American democracy nor American Christianity would be served by politicized churches regularly wading into partisan policy debates. “The institutional church has no historic mandate for routinely engaging in political specifics such as candidate endorsements or backing legislation,” wrote Tooley in an email.

Christian citizens might be called to work in specific areas of politics, that’s true. But if the institutional Church becomes politicized and partisan, Tooley explained it will lose its effectiveness for spreading the Gospel. We need only look at the history of the Mainline Protestant denominations to learn such a vital lesson.

“The sad history of the once predominant Mainline Protestant establishment,” wrote Tooley, “whose fall is partly due to its exchanging the Gospel for politic zeal, should be a warning to us all.”

Source: Evangelicals and Trump’s Promise to “Destroy” the Johnson Amendment

ERLC Promotes Marxist “Racial Justice” This Sunday

This Sunday is “Racial Reconciliation Sunday,” as bequeathed by the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. As a part of that effort, they have released free bulletin inserts to advertise the theme-day and promote the ERLC.

The insert begins with a quotation from Martin Luther King, who they said “famously spoke of the ‘fierce urgency of now’ in the pursuit of racial justice.

Matthew Hall, the author of the ERLC piece, writes, “While his critics seemed to assume that the ‘wheels of inevitability’ would bring about progress, King recognized that the call to direct action was one deeply rooted in a realistic and biblical vision of the world and God’s purposes.” Research into the doctrines and beliefs of King might reveal a less-than-adequate “biblical vision,” but we can’t really blame the ERLC for invoking King’s name and that’s not the point of this update. The point, rather, is to apprise you of the term “racial justice” as repeatedly used by the ERLC, its origins and meaning.

Whereas racial equality is a Biblical and God-honoring mandate for Christian cultures, “racial justice” is a term steeped in, born out of, saturated with and irrevocably linked to marxist social progressivism. 

“Racial Justice” is defined as “a proactive reinforcement of policies, practices, attitudes and actions that produce equitable power, access, opportunities, treatment, impacts and outcomes for all” (source link). And “racial justice” is repeatedly written of as a godly goal of the ERLC in their insert they’ve designed for this Sunday (pictured below). Frankly, the insert looks like something that one could expect to see in a American Baptist or United Church of Christ bulletin.

A Biblical worldview aims to declare the equality of people from all races and inherent equality in their design before God and their legal standing under the civil magistrate. The concept of “racial justice” demands the equitable “power” and “outcome” for all people. Conservatives think of equality in terms of opportunities and social progressives think of equality in terms of outcomes. This is why those who incite racial disunity like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson will never meet their desired end; the end does not come until all individuals have an equal share of the economic pie.

Pivotal to the promotion of “racial justice” is the notion of institutionalized and systemic racism, and the diminishing of individual responsibility. The ERLC has regularly promoted the idea that institutionalized and systemic racism exists in America over the course Russell Moore’s tenure (source link). This systemic and institutionalized racism can be proven, Moore and other progressives argue, because there are demographic “inequities” that make certain ethnicities “disadvantaged.” This class and race warfare, ironically enough, leads to the exact opposite of racial harmony and reconciliation.

The fact is, conservative organizations simply do not talk about “racial justice” because they recognize that it is a Marxist catchword that prevents racial harmony and promotes social progressive political theory designed to “level the playing field,” but ends up perpetuating mass poverty and government dependency. Russell Moore’s ERLC continues to use the term racial justice frequently nonetheless. However, the ACLU, United Methodist Women, Bernie Sanders and other progressivist outfits do use the term racial justice with frequency because it is from their lexicon.

So-called “racial justice” is fundamentally opposed to a Biblical worldview, and is a part of the field of Marxist “social justice” (read here to understand the link between social justice and Marxism). And simply put, the SBC’s new Moore-led ERLC has absolutely no problem with social justice.

Moore and his defenders, no doubt, will probably argue that he’s just slyly adopting the terminology of the left, that he means the term differently than the way everyone else uses it, and that its his way of “engaging the culture.”

Either that, or the former Democratic staffer is exactly who we’ve been warning you he is…a social progressive trojan horse in the SBC.

Source: ERLC Promotes Marxist “Racial Justice” This Sunday

Silence: movie promotes Contemplative Spirituality and sanctions apostasy

C.H. Fisher over at Truthkeepers reviews “Silence” that hit theaters this past December. He points out that what many people, including professing Christians, will miss is that, although the film is presented as true Christianity, it is actually Roman Catholicism  which Fisher demonstrates in his review:

“Silence” is the latest movie by Martin Scorsese, who also produced “The Last Temptation of Christ.” I have read several reviews by professing Christians who are recommending it without reservations. Additionally, the Dove Foundation awarded the movie 4 out of 5 doves. Charisma News asks, “Is Martin Scorsese’s ‘Silence’ Prophetic?” CBN also presented a rave review. Christianity Today entitled its review, “Scorsese’s ‘Silence’ Asks What It Really Costs to Follow Jesus.”

Another review in CT is entitled, “Silence Review: Hollywood’s Gift To The Church That Might Just Save Your Faith.” And what is the message of “Silence” that might save your life? The message of the movie is antithetical to true faith.

The title of Lumindeo’s review of the movie is, “Silence—A Christian’s Contemplative Guide.” [1] In the “About” section of the Lumindeo website it is described as “a network created by and for passionate followers of Jesus Christ.” If Lumindeo consists of passionate followers of Jesus Christ, why don’t they know that Christianity never grew in apostasy, but always in persecution and martyrdom?

View article →

Culture Wars, Political Correctness, and Communism

An ambitious title some might think. It is certainly big picture stuff. But that is vitally needed since so many people – including far too many Christians – never seem to see the big picture. If you only focus on the immediate and the particular, without looking at the long term and the general, we will be left adrift in understanding what is happening around us.

Consider the absolute madness of all things transsexual. Just a few short years ago no one was even talking about such things, let alone pretending they could live it out. Now the gender bender revolution is everywhere in the West – you cannot go a day without it being foisted upon us by the radicals, activist minority groups, academia, the media and our elites.

homo 111Yet many folks – and many Christians – are entirely clueless as to what is actually happening here. For example, I overheard one discussion recently in which a rather uninformed Christian dismissed concerns about the radical trans revolution, saying it was just part of a fallen world and all we need to do was be “compassionate” and “loving”. He did not have a clue.

So one must ask: how in the world did this complete lunacy become so much of a fixture in Western culture? And how did this happen almost overnight? For this we must look at history, and the history of ideas, and the history of ideology. This is because nothing happens in a vacuum.

The culture wars are closely connected to political correctness, and the PC straightjacket is simply cultural Marxism in action. And cultural Marxism is simply the more evolutionary form of the more revolutionary classical Marxism. They are all interconnected, and they are all heavily at work in the West.

If we do not see the big picture here, we will never understand what is happening, and we will never be able to withstand the onslaught we are experiencing, of which the radical sexual revolution is just one part. So let me here speak more to some of these big ticket items.

I of course have written often on these themes before, such as in these pieces:

billmuehlenberg.com/2014/06/28/cultural-marxism/
billmuehlenberg.com/2016/04/08/cultural-marxism-war-family/

In pieces such as these I provide the historical and ideological links between communism and the culture wars. And the short formulation of this would run something like the following: the trans revolution sprang from the homosexual revolution which sprang from the cultural revolution which was part of the new left which sprang from the old left which was part of the Communist war against America and the West.

Here I want to take this a bit further, utilising a few older pieces which very nicely demonstrate the ideological interconnections. The first is a 2005 collection of essays by Theodore Dalrymple called Our Culture, What’s Left of It. I have already done a review of this invaluable volume: billmuehlenberg.com/2006/08/18/a-review-of-our-culture-what%E2%80%99s-left-of-it-by-theodore-dalrymple-ivan-r-dee-2005/

He knows all about the culture wars and authoritarian regimes (his father was a communist, for example) and his insights here are well worth sharing. In a chapter on “The Dystopian Imagination” he looks at the prophetic warnings of Huxley and Orwell.

Their frightening works of fiction were based on the realities of “political schemes of secular salvation” – the most notable being communism and Nazism. Both authors “issue permanent calls to resist trends that, irrespective of the political regime we happen to find ourselves under, will impoverish human life.”

For example, consider just one of the warnings of Huxley:

Brave New World describes a sexual regime that increasingly resembles the one that rules today. A little boy, younger than ten, must visit a psychologist because he does not want to indulge in erotic play with a little girl, as his teachers demand: a situation we seem to be fast approaching. Not only does sex education start earlier and earlier in our schools, but publications, films, and television programs for ever-younger age groups grow more and more eroticized. It used to be that guilt would accompany the first sexual experiences of young people; now shame accompanies the lack of such experiences. In Huxley’s dystopia, as among liberals today, enlightenment and permissiveness are synonymous.

If we see a hard-core war on the family underway today, these writers fully anticipated it, based on their knowledge and experience of authoritarian regimes. Orwell for example prophetically warned about all this as well:

Consider his treatment of the family. In 1984, parents fear their children, whom the Spies, the Party’s youth organization, have indoctrinated. The Spies encourage and reward the denunciation of every political unorthodoxy, even in the nooks and crannies of private life, the very possibility of which is lost as a result. In modern England, parents fear their uncontrollable children, whom their peers, saturated with the violent and selfish values of a degraded popular culture, have indoctrinated. In both cases, parents are no longer the source of moral authority. Orwell forces us to confront imaginatively this overthrow of the natural order.

Take another theme found in Orwell: “Doublethink – the ability to hold two contradictory ideas and assent to both – is with us, too, and will remain so as long as we have large bureaucracies that claim to act for our own good while pursuing their own institutional interests.”

This is elaborated upon in an interview about his book:

FP: You make the shrewd observation of how political correctness engenders evil because of “the violence that it does to people’s souls by forcing them to say or imply what they do not believe, but must not question.” Can you talk about this a bit?
Dalrymple: Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.

My second source is a speech on “The Origins of Political Correctness” delivered by William S. Lind over a decade ago. He begins:

Where does all this stuff that you’ve heard about this morning – the victim feminism, the gay rights movement, the invented statistics, the rewritten history, the lies, the demands, all the rest of it – where does it come from? For the first time in our history, Americans have to be fearful of what they say, of what they write, and of what they think. They have to be afraid of using the wrong word, a word denounced as offensive or insensitive, or racist, sexist, or homophobic.

He answers his question as follows:

If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we quickly find out exactly what it is. Political Correctness is cultural Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the hippies and the peace movement, but back to World War I. If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with classical Marxism the parallels are very obvious.
First of all, both are totalitarian ideologies. The totalitarian nature of Political Correctness is revealed nowhere more clearly than on college campuses, many of which at this point are small ivy-covered North Koreas, where the student or faculty member who dares to cross any of the lines set up by the gender feminist or the homosexual-rights activists, or the local black or Hispanic group, or any of the other sainted “victims” groups that PC revolves around, quickly find themselves in judicial trouble. Within the small legal system of the college, they face formal charges – some star-chamber proceeding – and punishment. That is a little look into the future that Political Correctness intends for the nation as a whole.

He looks closely at the ideas and activities of Gramsci, Lukacs, Horkheimer, Adorno, Fromm and Marcuse, and then concludes:

America today is in the throes of the greatest and direst transformation in its history. We are becoming an ideological state, a country with an official state ideology enforced by the power of the state. In “hate crimes” we now have people serving jail sentences for political thoughts. And the Congress is now moving to expand that category ever further. Affirmative action is part of it. The terror against anyone who dissents from Political Correctness on campus is part of it. It’s exactly what we have seen happen in Russia, in Germany, in Italy, in China, and now it’s coming here. And we don’t recognize it because we call it Political Correctness and laugh it off. My message today is that it’s not funny, it’s here, it’s growing and it will eventually destroy, as it seeks to destroy, everything that we have ever defined as our freedom and our culture.

So if you are trying to get your head around things like the mass insanity of all things trans, you need to look at the bigger picture. I am not saying here that all the culture war madness we are experiencing is the result of one monolithic conspiracy, but I am saying that ideas have consequences, and bad ideas by Marxists are still alive and well today.

The culture wars are part of political correctness which is part of cultural Marxism which is part of the bigger communist rage against the West, freedom, religion and democracy.

archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=7445
http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/

[1641 words]

The post Culture Wars, Political Correctness, and Communism appeared first on CultureWatch.