Why Even Secularists Might Not Like a Post-Christian West

Many who deride Christianity fail to see that the moral underpinnings of Western society rely on the Gospel, and a post-Christian society may not be palatable to them either. They are cutting off the branch on which they sit.

The West is becoming post-Christian.

Fewer people are identifying as Christians. Christian views on gender, marriage and sexuality are increasingly seen as extreme.[1] As a result, Christianity itself is increasingly marginalised.

And while many secular commentators are happy with this state of affairs (just look at the responses to Roe v Wade being overturned), there may well come a day when they, their secular children or grandchildren yearn for the time when Christianity had greater influence in the West.

Does that sound far-fetched? Not if we explore what a post-Christian West looks like.

The Secularist Dream: Christian Morality Without Christ

The secular world’s relationship with Christianity is much like a celebrity marriage: it’s complicated.[2]  For starters, our secular world likes much of Christian morality, but can’t stand the Jesus of the gospels. They want the Kingdom without the King. As Australian Christian author and academic Michael Bird explains in his new book: Religious Freedom in a Secular Age,

‘At the present time, the Western world is struggling to come to terms with its (post-) Christian heritage. We live in a venerable paradox whereby political classes are trying to renew society by vigorously reworking the Christian moral vision of love for neighbour, seeking the good of the “other”, protecting the vulnerable and consoling the victimized, even while excoriating Christianity for its former hegemony and deriding Christian beliefs as unpalatable myths and fanciful superstitions.’ [3]

But how long will Kingdom ethics last across society if we ignore the King?

Without Christ in the West, Christian morality will be forgotten

According to Bird, Christian morality won’t last long without Christianity:

‘A post-Christian society will inevitably become post-Christian in practice. If liberal social ethics are unmoored from their theological foundations and metaphysical committments in Christianity, then the dominant ethical patterns will inevitably drift in a different direction as various currents carry them along… After post-Christianity comes either a neo-paganism or a consistently humanist Nietzschean philosophy. In either case, brute power would be all that matters, for might makes right, and truth means nothing more than what benefits the tribe.’ [4]

Now, that’s not to say everything was perfect under a Christianised West.

There was much that was wrong in the West of yesteryear: racism (which is thankfully less bad now than it has ever been), poverty, misogyny, etc. Nobody is arguing that it was anywhere near perfect. But what allowed for moral improvement was a Christian moral foundation that saw people as human beings deserving of dignity and equal treatment (just look at the speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr). The Christian worldview fuelled the fight against slavery, racism, and unequal treatment of minorities.

And it’s this worldview that’s being replaced.

The Post-Christian World of Today and Tomorrow

And so,  what does a post-Christian society look like?

We need only look at the different trajectories of our culture, let alone our politics, to see the birth of a post-Christian West:

The Post-Christian Right: Race and Nation

While many a secular person may have held their nose at Christian conservatives, and their advocacy on issues such as abortion, marriage and euthanasia, things have changed now that the right is less religious than before.

Writing about the American political and cultural scene, The Atlantic’s Peter Beinhart argues:

‘For decades, liberals have called the Christian right intolerant. When conservatives disengage from organized religion, however, they don’t become more tolerant. They become intolerant in different ways. …

Whatever the reason, when cultural conservatives disengage from organized religion, they tend to redraw the boundaries of identity, de-emphasizing morality and religion and emphasizing race and nation. Trump is both a beneficiary and a driver of that shift.

So is the alt-right.

He concludes:

For years, political commentators dreamed that the culture war over religious morality that began in the 1960s and ’70s would fade. It has. And the more secular, more ferociously national and racial culture war that has followed is worse.

Welcome to the post-Christian right, where racial politics and a hatred of those who are different fuel their politics.

What about the post-Christian Left?

The Post-Christian Left: The Rise of Totalitarian Woke Politics

The post-Christian Left is replacing Christian ethics with a totalitarian view of reality commonly known as Wokism.

This can be seen in the areas of gender and sexuality. As centre-left commentator Abigail Shrier points out:

Those of us who dare express skepticism of gender-affirmative care are routinely censored, denied Twitter verification, suspended from social media, or have our online fundraisers shut down — all for the sin of telling truths that the left wishes never to hear.

Like those living outside the Free World, we adjust our behavior, which of course is the aim: We edit our tweets a little more carefully. We refrain from “liking” the tweet of anyone who’s been sent to the frosty exile of Twitter suspension.

We don’t want to do these things; most days, we fight like hell. But no independent journalist can easily promote her articles without Twitter or earn a living without the benefit of Stripe and PayPal.’

And in Australia, such ideology is weaponised through laws such as the Victorian anti-gay conversion law, which takes aim at churches or even parents who don’t affirm a child’s desire to transition to the opposite gender.

While such laws and actions might currently be aimed at those who differ from the woke view of reality, the goalposts of wokism are ever-expanding. Thus, secular people who might be comfortable with the reach of the State today may find themselves on the wrong end of the law tomorrow.

Will Secularists Look Back Nostalgically to a Christianised West?

In light of these changes in the moral outlook of Western society, Bird offers a reflective question:

‘I do wonder if we might one day become nostalgic for a Christendom if it turns out that what comes after a de-Christianized West is anything like the savagery and superstition that preceded Christendom.’ [5]

Thank the Source

Christians Are a Minority for the First Time In Australian History

Atheists are cheering at the drop in religious affiliation in our nation. However, with Christians becoming a minority, those who have abandoned faith in God have embraced faith in other things — in modern ideologies.

Australian census data released yesterday shows that — for the first time in our nation’s history — Christians are in the minority.

News that just 44% of Australians now identify as Christian — down from 74.6% in 1996 — sent Christianophobes into a frenzy.

“Abandoning God” was trending on social media as atheists danced on Christianity’s grave.

To be fair, the godless needed something to cheer about after Pride Week ended with the US Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade.

Former journalist Mike Carlton wrote:

Now that “Christians” are a minority group, do you think they’ll stop telling the rest of us how to live?

Does he mean like the LGBTQ+ minority?

Christian minority

Dreadful Consequences

The massive drop in the number of people identifying as Christian coincides with a massive spike in the number of people with mental health issues.

There’s no connection, of course. It’s all pure coincidence.

Yes, we took a sponge to wipe away the entire horizon. And?

Sure, we drank the entire sea. But honestly, it hasn’t affected us.

And it’s true that we unchained the earth from its sun and are now plunging continually — backward, sideward, forward, in all directions; straying through an infinite nothing.

But we categorically deny that has anything at all to do with the fact that mental health is now the nation’s number one health concern. It’s all just random chance, like the universe.

Illogical

Many atheists were unhappy with the Sydney Morning Herald reporting that Australians were “abandoning God”.

You cannot abandon something that never existed, they argued.

‘We are not abandoning God so much as embracing common sense,’ wrote one.

To which I would reply: ‘What is a woman?

You have to love today’s progressive Left. They ridicule Christians for believing in “fairytales” while insisting that men can have periods.

And if you disagree, they’ll destroy you. Hallelujah!

New Religions

While it’s true that Australia is becoming less Christian, it is also true that we are becoming more religious.Bob Dylan

As the Pope of Folk, Bob Dylan, sang:

You’re gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed
You’re gonna have to serve somebody
Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you’re gonna have to serve somebody

In other words, our brains have “religion hardware” built in from the factory. Specific religions or ideologies are just the software we choose to run.

Of course, the progressive Left will deny that they are religious, but that’s exactly what you would expect from a state-sanctioned religion. There is no separation of Woke and State.

The absence of divinity makes the progressive Left’s belief system no less religious. Godless Lefties define religion as only those belief systems that subscribe to the idea of a divine being in order to dismiss other religions as mere religions, and make theirs appear to be something greater.

Christian doctrines have simply been replaced by hardline secular ideologies, which are frequently more dogmatic, intolerant, and hostile to non-believers, blasphemers, and apostates.

Modern Taboos and Sacred Cows

These days you are more likely to lose your job for using the wrong pronouns than for using the Lord’s name in vain.

And you are more likely to lose friends and family for failing to get your 18th booster shot than for failing to get baptised.

John AndersonFormer Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson, appearing on Sky News last night, made the salient point:

“To those who are dancing on the grave as they think they are of Christianity — what’s the alternative, where is your better way?”

Progressives on Twitter dismissed Mr Anderson as simply uptight.

If only his parents had taken him along to Drag Queen Story Time as a child, he’d be more inclusive and open-minded.

Christianity is in the minority now. The progressive Left is creating a brave new world without the old superstitions that old fuddy-duddies like Mr Anderson would have us cling to.

Forget the Apostle’s Creed and repeat after me: “Trans women are women” and “My body, my choice” and “Black Lives Matter.”

Holy Communion has been replaced by the new sacraments of abortion, and puberty blockers.

Slavery, and coal, are the original sins. Greta Thunberg and George Floyd are the new saints. Police and whites and TERFS are the new devils.

Welcome to Country, carbon offsets, taking a knee and diversity training are to be our penance.

Critical Race Theory is gospel. So are net-zero emissions.

Mainstream media are the priests.

Public schools are the youth groups (which is why progressives don’t want Christian chaplains anywhere near them) and Davos is the Holy City.

Forget blind faith in God. The new religion requires only blind faith in government.

John Lennon’s Imagine is the only religious hymn you ever need sing.

Oh, and if you disagree with any of this, you will be cancelled. It’s kind of like being condemned to hell, except that there is no chance of redemption. Ever. Amen.

As GK Chesterton famously quipped:

“When men stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing; they believe in anything.”

Or as the Apostle Paul put it:

“They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshipped and served the created things rather than the Creator… their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools.”

That Christian belief is now in the minority does not mean Australia is less religious, only that a new religion is taking its place.

With the famous Irish poet William Yeats, many of us look apprehensively at the census results and wonder:

“What rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?”

___

Originally published at The James Macpherson Report.
Subscribe to his Substack here for daily witty commentary.

Thank the Source

MARINES expose PH@RMA, K@SH on FIRE, Moms have had enough, GUN grab FAILING? Pray!

And We Know Published June 13, 2022

Enjoyed this video? Join my Locals community for exclusive content at andweknowofficial.locals.com!

Get you Back Up Food supply here
http://preparewithandweknow.com/
My Patriot Supply
———————————————

Get The Fastest No-Log VPN Today Up to 50% OFF:
http://virtualshield.com/andweknow
Start Today For FREE for 30 days ^^ Click Above
————————————–

*Our AWK Website: https://www.andweknow.com/

*Our 24/7 NEWS SITE: https://thepatriotlight.com/

*Uncensored VIDS: https://andweknow.tv

SourceSouth Australian Gov Criminal Organisation

5 Subconscious Lies of Our Therapeutic Age that Can Deceive Christians

5 Subconscious Lies of Our Therapeutic Age that Can Deceive Christians

As we shed our traditional Judaeo-Christian values, our worldview has radically changed, including our expectations of life, of others, and what we base our identity upon. Feelings trump reason and suffering is unacceptable.

Over 200 years ago, a revolution was launched across the West.

Or rather, revolutions. Western societies began to move away from Christianity. They moved slowly at first — like a crawling baby. But as that baby grew, it became less and less Christian, shaking off its religious beliefs.

Fast forward to 2022, and this child (to continue the metaphor) has a radically different view of reality and humanity than 200 years ago.

We’re now a society where our feelings are critical to our existence. Or, in the words of sociologist Philip Rieff, we live in the ‘therapeutic age’: we’re driven and defined by our feelings in ways utterly foreign to our ancestors. And this has spawned all sorts of beliefs that shape us and our view of the world.

What’s more, these beliefs are mostly subconscious:

We don’t consciously choose to accept them. Instead, we ‘catch’ them as we swim in the sea of Western culture. Whether through the media we consume (e.g. Disney, Hollywood), our workplaces, social media, or friends.

And because these beliefs are unbiblical, they can wreak havoc on people’s lives. 

Here are 5 of those beliefs:

1) Our Feelings Determine Who We Are

This belief is the bedrock of our therapeutic feeling-based age.

You see it everywhere, from Disney (‘just follow your heart’) to the transgender movement (your internal feelings about gender trump your physical biology). Genuine ‘authenticity’ now means living out your inner feelings, no matter what they are (and woe to anyone who tells you otherwise). [1]

But when anyone — including Christians — adopts this belief, it shapes us in strange and ungodly ways:

We can let our feelings trump our given identity in Christ. We can let our emotions drive our moral decision-making. And we can judge our Church not on its faithful teaching and living, but on how it serves our felt needs.

2) True Freedom Means Defining Your Own Existence

If our feelings determine our identity, then true freedom means society giving us space to express that identity.

This view of freedom is a bedrock belief that sustains the abortion rights movement across the West. As the US Supreme Court wrote in a ruling about abortion rights:

‘At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, of the mystery of human life. Beliefs about these matters could not define the attributes of personhood were they formed under the compulsion of the State.’ [2]

With freedom thus redefined, oppression is also redefined: oppression now includes anything — any belief, any law — that prevents people from expressing their own view of existence (the Biblical sexual ethic, anyone?). And so, Christians have moved from being the ‘moral guys’ to being the ‘bad guys’.

While Christians feel this pressure externally, from society, it’s also a belief that shapes us internally:

We’re less willing to submit ourselves to others, like church leaders and religious institutions. We’re less likely to see submission as good. We don’t want others telling us what to do.

And if we’re in positions of leadership, we’re less likely to want to enforce rules like church discipline, as it feels a little unfair.

3) Always Trust Your Feelings

Because feelings are essential to who we are, they now hold authority like never before.

If something or someone makes you uncomfortable, then the problem is always the other person and never your feelings. Your interpretation of reality (which leads to those feelings) is always right because we are our feelings.

We see this in the rise of cancel culture, where any person or belief that causes people to feel offended is attacked and shut down. There’s little engagement or understanding with what the other person might mean or why they might hold to that view — let alone whether that view is true or not.

4) We’re Meant to Have Good Feelings, So Avoid Anything That Makes You Feel Bad

The aim of life in a therapeutic age has moved from having good character to having good feelings.

Feeling good becomes a moral duty: the big question we ask ourselves is no longer ‘what’s the right thing to do?’, but rather ‘how will it make me feel?’ And so, as a culture, we avoid anything that makes us feel bad:

  • We avoid the difficult person at Church because they don’t make us feel good.

  • We avoid having those hard but important conversations because they make us feel uncomfortable.

  • And we avoid conflict like it’s an out-of-fashion pair of jeans.

  • We use people and things to help us feel good: life becomes increasingly self-centred.

Of course, this has all sorts of problems because constantly feeling good is an unrealistic goal. We’ll regularly feel frustrated. Yes, we might feel good for a while — when we get that new phone, friend, or partner. But it never lasts.

More perniciously, life lived for self-centred feelings and avoidance of difficulty can leave a trail of damaged relationships.

(Ask almost any celebrity.)

5) Suffering Serves No Good Purpose

If life is all about feeling good, then suffering is all bad: it serves no purpose.

Suffering gets in the way of my feeling good. And I’ll do anything to avoid it. There’s no ‘higher purpose’ to my suffering.

But we can’t avoid suffering in a fallen world.

It’s part of our human condition (no matter how much we try to avoid it). Adopting a therapeutic view of suffering leads to anger and even despair when suffering hits us. We’ll feel discombobulated and fearful, worrying about the next bout of suffering that might come our way.

These 5 beliefs, these lies, are deeply embedded in Western Culture. But in an upcoming post, we’ll explore how we can respond to each of them in a way that frees us from their grip.

___

[1] It’s worth mentioning there are still culturally accepted limits to what desires people can live out: e.g. pedophilia is still unacceptable.

[2] Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 851 (1992). Quoted in Carl Trueman, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self – Cultural Amnesia, Expressive Individualism, and the Road to Sexual Revolution (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway, 2020), 303.

___

Originally published at AkosBalogh.com. Photo by Yan Krukov.

Thank the Source

The Real Oppression, and How It Works

The Real Oppression, and How It Works

Cultural Marxism has thoroughly infected our political system, making people fearful to speak up against the prevailing progressive narrative. Minority groups reinforce each other’s fringe causes, to the detriment of majority constituents.

How is it that tiny groups of people — such as the LGBTQ lobby for instance — exert such huge influence on the national agenda?

The answer is in the way left-leaning political parties now operate.

The Left used to defend workers against exploitation from bosses. But when capitalism created a burgeoning middle class, workers didn’t feel exploited.

The Left needed a new constituency.

So they focused on becoming the Party of ‘fairness’, promising to represent oppressed minorities.

Cultural Marxism

This is where the Left derives its moral authority — as defenders of oppressed minorities.

And so left-wing parties — whether the Democrats in America or the ALP in Australia — started collecting single-issue victimhood voters.

All of these oppressed minorities demand that their obsession — defund the police, net-zero emissions, men in women’s sports etc — take precedence. And their obsessions are as numerous as they are ridiculous.

As a result, the Left is now primarily concerned with defending the increasingly neurotic tics of increasingly implausible minority groups.

The Left reason that if they can collect enough of these tiny groups, they will have sufficient votes to win power.

And in return for votes, they promise to impose the crazy demands of their grab-bag of minorities on the entire populace.

To summarise …

LGBTQIA+ activists are cobbled together with climate justice warriors who are cobbled together with animal rights activists who are cobbled together with race-baiters and so on.

Each of these groups might represent only 1% of the population on their own, but if you can scoop up enough of them to make around 40% of the vote, suddenly they are a major political force.

The party is then obliged to support the crazed demands of all these groups if and when it wins government.

This is how a left-wing party, if it wins government, ends up imposing the demands of 1% of the population on the other 99%.

But it’s more interesting than that.

Banding Together

Recently, in researching to write about LGBTQ awareness days, I discovered that gay rights groups list — among the various lesbian awareness and pansexual visibility days they promote — Indigenous rights days.

Why are gays promoting Indigenous rights? The answer is simple: Horse trading.

Every minority group trades political acceptance for its cause in exchange for supporting everyone else’s cause.

So Indigenous activists get support for Constitutional recognition and a treaty, while men who wear dresses get support for being on the girls’ football team.

Feminists get late-term abortions, while climate activists get to demand car-free days in major cities of the world.

And the laptop class, who are paid six-figure sums to work from home, get to make everyone wear masks.

They each agree to support the other’s crazy demands in the expectation that their particular crazy demand will be realised if and when the Party wins power.

This helps to explain cancel culture.

Censorship

Cancel culture is really a cooperative of crazies working together to guard their own brand of insanity which they know very well would never be permitted, let alone legislated, in a healthy society. By working together to destroy norms, they normalise their own pathologies.

Now you understand why political leaders on the Left are so afraid to define a woman. It’s not that they don’t believe gender is a fixed biological reality. It’s just that they don’t want to upset the bucket of minorities they hope to carry to the ballot box.

That is why lefty politicians will accept crazy ideas and even defend them, despite the fact they don’t believe them.

In Australia recently, the Labor leader was asked if men could get pregnant. He answered “no”, but in such a way that his displeasure at being asked the question was clearly evident.

Why did he resent the question?

Because it backed him into a corner where he would be forced to deny one of the core tenants of trans people — a tiny group he is counting on to win power.

Let me conclude with a final observation.

The Left expects us to believe they are the ones standing against oppression. This is the exact opposite of what is happening.

After all, when 1% of the country gets to tell everyone else how to live, that’s real oppression.

___

Originally published at The James Macpherson Report.
Subscribe to his Substack here for daily witty commentary.
Photo by Paddy O’Sullivan.

Thank the Source

How Western Secular Beliefs are Feeding an Epidemic of Cowardice

How Western Secular Beliefs are Feeding an Epidemic of Cowardice

We have become too comfortable in the West, unwilling to risk our earthly security in standing up for truth and freedom. How have we come to this juncture, and is there a way to become brave again?

Stories of Ukraine keep filling our headlines and social media feeds.

Despite being invaded by a much stronger country, Ukrainians are still resisting. More to the point, they are doing so bravely. Centre-Left social commentator Bari Weiss contrasts their bravery in the face of horrifying odds with our modern Western culture:

I cannot help but notice the gap between [the Ukrainians] and us. Between the bigness of their vision and their mission and the smallness of ours. Between their moral clarity and our moral confusion. Between their spine and our spinelessness. Between their courage and our epidemic of cowardice.

Our epidemic of cowardice.

I can’t stop thinking about that line — it’s got such an awful ring to it. No culture has ever seen cowardice as a moral virtue, and being a coward has always been associated with shame. Lest we’re in any moral doubt, the Bible also condemns cowardice (e.g. Rev 21:8).

Rightly so: cowards shirk moral responsibility. They’re silent when they should speak. They run when they should stand. And they get others to do their work for them.

I remember cowardice being on full display in 2012 when the Italian vessel Costa Concordia sank in the shallow waters off the coast of Italy. As one commentator has written:

On the Titanic, the male passengers gave their lives for the women and would never have considered doing otherwise. On the Costa Concordia, in the words of a female passenger, “There were big men, crew members, pushing their way past us to get into the lifeboat.”

The Captain also abandoned his ship, leaving the passengers to suffer and die without him (he was later put under house arrest for dereliction of duty). It’s hard to describe those actions without the word ‘coward’ thrown in.

An Epidemic of Cowardice?

But do we have an epidemic of cowardice?

It’s a tricky question to answer.

After all, nobody’s invading Australia or any other Western nation: that would be the ultimate test of national bravery. And yet, there are signs that people are more fearful today across the West than in previous years:

  • People seem hesitant to speak up about many issues, especially when they think differently to the prevailing cultural orthodoxy (e.g. on gender and sexuality).

  • Cancel culture is a real thing: not only does it chill speech, but more often than not leads to swift apologies from the cancelled, rather than Martin Luther-like ‘here I stand, I can do no other’ responses.

  • And if panic buying is any indication, fear is bubbling beneath the surface, ready to launch us to grab the last rolls of toilet paper when #toiletpaperapocalypse trends on social media.

Update: there is new evidence that most Australians would flee if we faced the same situation as Ukraine. The Australian’s foreign affairs editor Greg Sheridan writes about a new poll just released:

‘A slim majority of Australians, if faced with a situation similar to that faced by Ukrainians, would not stay and fight for their country but would seek to flee overseas, according to a fascinating poll conducted by Compass Polling.’

Yes, Weiss may have a point when it comes to our growing fearfulness and – dare I say it – cowardice.

The Beliefs that Provide Fertile Soil for Cowardice

Whether or not there is an epidemic of cowardice, there are many common secular beliefs that provide fertile soil for the growth of cowardice.

Here are 6 such beliefs:

1) We value the ‘victim mentality’

Western culture now places special moral value on being a victim.

While there are genuine victims that should be valued and cared for, we now live at a time when nearly everyone wants to be seen as an oppressed victim by virtue of their group identity. You get special privileges and cultural kudos if you’re a victim, and you get to say and do things that other people can’t, especially about political and cultural issues.

And so, the victim mentality is rife across much of the West.

But the victim mentality is destructive. There’s a tendency to blame your problems on others, and expect them to fix them for you. It corrodes individual and group agency and turns your focus inwards rather than to the needs of others.

Such a mentality doesn’t promote bravery. On the contrary, it lays down fertile soil in which cowardice can grow.

2) We live for nothing greater than ourselves

We’re a culture that lives for no higher purpose than self-fulfilment.

Whether it be the fulfilment from work, family, or entertainment, our highest goal is self. We’re self-made people.

But if you live for nothing greater than yourself, you won’t fight for anything but yourself.

Instead, you’ll stay silent instead of speaking up. You won’t stand up for others if it means you might get hurt. And why would you put your life on the line for your nation?

3) We expect (and even demand) to be comfortable

Modern Westerners are the most physically comfortable generation in human history.

We haven’t had to fight a major war in 70 years. We’re not under constant threat. And our living standards are through the roof (especially compared to previous generations).

We expect, nay demand, comfort.

And if that’s our expectation, we’re less likely to do things that compromise comfort.

4) Our society is atomised and lonely, with little holding us together

While previous generations had many ‘mediating institutions’ with loyal followings such as social clubs, religious organisations and philanthropic movements that brought people together, such organisations are few and far between.

Most people in our culture don’t belong to any particular club (or if they do, they’re more consumers than givers). We’re more lonely, more individualistic than in recent history. As such, there’s little holding us together.

Yes, there are tribal loyalties strengthened through the rise of identity politics (e.g. race, sexuality, gender).

But neither tribalism nor individualism can hold societies together, let alone inspire people to sacrifice themselves for others outside their inner circle. Without bonds of affection for others, we revert to only thinking about ourselves.

That’s not exactly a recipe for courage.

5) We increasingly see the West not as a beacon of hope, but as a bastion of bigotry

Many secular elites across the West have bought into Critical Theory-inspired views of Western Civilisation.

They increasingly see the West as irredeemably racist, xenophobic, homophobic, misogynistic, imperialistic, patriarchal and bigoted. They believe White Supremacy is rife. And that it would be best to overthrow it all and start again.

While few people deny that the West has its share of shortcomings, this view of the West will not inspire anyone to fight for it when push comes to shove.

6) We see morality as relative: there’s no principle worth standing up for

Moral and cultural relativism is rife across the West. We don’t see one person’s or culture’s morality as any better or worse than anyone else’s. We can’t condemn other people for their moral beliefs, because we don’t believe in a moral standard that transcends time and culture.

So, moral confusion is rife. We’re hard-pressed to find reasons why we should stand up for ethical principles.

(Admittedly, many secular woke people hold to a moral standard, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has shown the bankruptcy of moral relativism.)

Nevertheless, if there is no external moral standard by which we can judge people of other cultures (e.g. Putin, China) and times (e.g. Stalin), then why risk your neck to uphold moral principles like justice and freedom?

What about Christians? Do we suffer from cowardice?

Christians are swimming in the same sea as the rest of our culture.

We love to be loved and hate to be hated. We’re tempted to live for nothing but ourselves and our own comfort. Furthermore, our views are under increasing attack, both culturally, and in some parts of the West, legally. In many ways, our situation is more pressured than our secular friends.

And yet.

We have all the resources we need to live courageously. Even though we are ordinary, weak people, we follow an extraordinary God who gives us courage:

  • We have the Holy Spirit giving us strength to be obedient to God in the face of persecution and pressure (e.g. Matthew 10:18-20)

  • We have the hope and security of eternal life, which means we don’t have to fear even in the face of death (Matthew 10:28)

  • Our God is in sovereign control, working out all things for our good (Romans 8:28)

  • Our aim in life is no longer comfort and ease, but to be like Christ (Hebrews 12:3-11). It’s an honour to suffer for Him, and our reward in heaven will be great (Matthew 5:10-12).

 Yes, Christians may be reviled for our counter-cultural beliefs. Yes, there may be an epidemic of cowardice across much of the West.

But may it never be said that Christians are cowardly.

Thank the Source

The Big Picture: Can We See What is Seeking to Shape Our World?

The Big Picture: Can We See What is Seeking to Shape Our World?

The manmade coronavirus (COVID-19/C-19) pandemic has severely altered our lives. How has this come to pass? What sort of world are our political leaders trying to construct?

How has 2022 been for you? Have you breathed again? Is your life more or less ‘back to normal’? Apart from extra forms at the airport and a mask on the bus, we are pretty much back to normal in New South Wales. Meanwhile, our hearts have gone out to those involved in the tragedy in Ukraine and to those thrice devasted by the floods in eastern Australia.

Then to cap it all, those incessant political ads and the media hanging on every word from Scott Morrison (Liberal/Nationals) and Anthony Albanese (Australian Labor Party) as they limber up for the next federal election in late May.

I propose to you that this isn’t even half the picture — it is in fact simply a few frames taken from the biggest blockbuster movie of all time, that we are all staring into. We have all been blinded by these ‘stills’ extracted from the dynamic, apocalyptic reality being played out all around us and within us. Come with me as I seek to paint the big picture of what is seeking to shape our world.

My story

On Friday 16 July 2021 I retired from teaching after 46 years. It was in the midst of one of Sydney’s lockdowns. A few days later, I remember sitting in my backyard, enjoying the winter sun, having a long chat with a good friend on the phone ‘about all these things that have come upon the earth in recent times’ (Luke 24:18 — paraphrased).

My friend and I agreed that the world had been turned upside down since 2020. There was more which simply did not make sense than what did. I recall the feeling of being swept along as if on the breaking crest of a tidal wave, totally out of control — and what is more, the people of the world were being led by national governments that seemed ‘out of control’, while they sought to give an air of certainty and confidence: ‘We have got this!

But teaching is in my DNA, and in my blood. What do teachers do if they don’t understand something? They research, they question, they problem-solve. That is exactly what I have done for ten months, and I am not stopping. I have dug deep, followed evidence lines, sought to apply the principles of critical thinking and the scientific method. I have sought never to ‘accept’ anything ‘just because ‘someone says so’.

The hardest thing

I know now what I didn’t know a year ago. An obvious statement, yes, but a year ago my life radically changed. I had the opportunity, afforded to few, to begin to discover what I didn’t know. It’s as if a chasm had opened up between my present and my past; my present research-focused perspective contrasts radically with my past, which was simply dominated by work.

I now have a growing burden to seek ways to bridge this chasm and connect anew with people dominated by their work who have not had the time or space to wonder about the meaning of ‘these things’.

Most people have not had the time to think, so they have simply packaged these events of the last two years into their old paradigm. They have not been ‘happy’, or often even ‘aware’ that some things simply did not add up; they have simply been praying that some semblance of normality would return one day.

This line of thought suggests that I am wiser than most. No, I am sure that is not the case. I simply suspect that I have had the good fortune to see the big picture that others haven’t. It feels like I have been given some pages from a new dictionary that has not been published yet. It is daunting and exciting all at the same time!

I hope this essay can shine a light on these pages and that the reader won’t feel belittled or disrespected in any way. I call on you to come with me on a journey of joining the dots to reveal the big picture.

I have attempted to capture the length and breadth of this immense canvas in my essay — Can we see the Big Picture, what is seeking to shape our world?  I have divided it up into roughly three equal parts: Where to start? The World Economic Forum; What’s next? The culture as we know it and The better way. The culture we can know now.

It seemed best to paint the background first, the World Economic Forum’s designs on the world. Then I try to examine the culture in which we find ourselves. Finally, I suggest there is a better story to tell, which has a much happier ending for the play.

Where to start? The World Economic Forum

When we enter a maze, that first step is so important: will it lead us to the truth, the exit, or it will lead us down a blind rabbit hole? My aim here is not to pepper my text with countless references, but rather to paint a big picture with you.

Let’s start with the World Economic Forum (WEF) an international non-governmental and lobbying organisation based in Switzerland, founded in 1971 by a German engineer and economist Klaus Schwab, who still leads it today.

For years the WEF has been publishing its plans for global reform for all to see. Their centrepiece, The Great Reset, is dependent on global cooperation and participation, but has never had the endorsement of community or political debate in western democratic counties.

The WEF has been totally transparent about the fact that they have used the C-19 event as a catalyst for the rollout of their Great Reset agenda. Yet — have you noticed? — this line has never been highlighted, explored or challenged within the mainstream media.

The Great Reset agenda

I would argue that the WEF’s foundational principle, namely, equality for the peoples of the world, is a laudable aspiration. Why would any civilised society advocate for inequality and discrimination?

However, the WEF realised that from their perspective, capitalism, entrepreneurship and individual responsibility were never going to bring about their agenda. Rather, they had to roll out their own ‘one world government’ to orchestrate their plan.

Today their agenda is well on the way, and I don’t know of any western democracy putting up their hand to say, ‘hang on there, can we stop and talk about this, can we have a vote on this to see if we actually want in?’ They are all on board and have become instruments in the de facto one world un-elected government conducted by the WEF. Do the ends justify the means?

We will own nothing and be happy: the financial and social reset

This line has received some coverage in mainstream media, but in such a way as to make it sound funny, ‘as if that could ever happen’. Let’s join some dots here. Over the last two years, governments around the world started printing money like there was no tomorrow.

They never seem to stop and ask, will we ever repay this, because it was all part of the WEF plan, and they had been assured that they would never have to worry about that as there would be a new global currency introduced based on the state owning everything and the people paying rent to use stuff — the people owning nothing!

The second part, ‘be happy’, is how the WEF envision us all post-capitalism. We will never again be stressed by the pressures of having to provide for our family, as the state will manage everything. So, at a stroke, they believe the state will eliminate depression and stress from society, as we will all be happy!

But will we really be happy with no freedom to create novel new ideas, to be entrepreneurial, to be hardworking, to have the joy of personal altruism; to be personally responsible for ourselves and our loved ones?

My reading of the totalitarian state, of the communist state, of ultra-socialism, is that their people are far from happy, and all down through history such regimes have never lasted, so why would global totalitarianism work any better today?

Population control

Ever since Thomas Malthus (1766-1834, English cleric, scholar and economist) founded demography with his catastrophic predictions of the global population’s growth far outstripping food supply, many have wrestled with how to counter exponential population growth. China’s one-child policy for example; Planned Parenthood with the pill another.

The WEF has calculated that wealth is inversely proportional to population growth and is unashamedly intent on limiting reproduction rates, as that means there will be more resources to go around for the smaller population. Bill Gates has been quite open about this for many years.

There have been many rabbit warren scenarios describing the linkage between C-19 injections and population control. I am not advocating for any of them per se; I do not have the expertise to deny them either.

But what I do believe is that there is a case to be brought against Anthony Fauci and Bill Gates for their initiation of innumerable ‘vaccine trials’ that should never have gone ahead, as they resulted in sterility, infertility, death of children and premature death of childbearing-aged women, well before C-19 came on the scene.

Now with the C-19 injection roll-out, there have been an extraordinary number of deaths of young athletic males and higher than ever recorded miscarriage rates in pregnant females. Further, we do not know the long-term impact on fertility rates or other adverse effects of the C-19 injections.

The WEF’s other agendas

The reach of the WEF is mind-boggling! For me, their audacity to believe they have the authority to choreograph the globe’s finance, social structures and population dynamics is extraordinary. Perhaps what is even more remarkable is that western democracies have bought into this without question. Perhaps one explanation is as Klaus Schwab boasted recently: the WEF has already ‘penetrated’ western nations’ governments’ cabinets with ‘up-and-coming WEF new leaders’!

In this next section, I will seek to paint the WEF’s Green Agenda, starting with the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) and how they play in harmony with the Great Reset, and how they will become an increasingly dominant agenda as the C-19 headlines begin to fade into the background.

Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF)

The Worldwide Fund for Nature is an international non-governmental organisation founded in 1961, in Morges, Switzerland (the same town where the WEF was to be founded a decade later). The fund works in the fields of wilderness preservation and the reduction of human impact on the environment and has a most cute-looking black and white panda for its logo.

I am all for wilderness preservation and the reduction of human impact on the environment; you can see me collecting plastic rubbish in my local community for recycling, for example. But the WWF does much more than seek to protect endangered species and prosecute illegal ivory hunters. For example, the WWF has pledged to create a climate-resilient and zero-carbon world, powered by renewable energy. Yes, the WWF is the foundation stone for the WEF’s Green Agenda.

The Green Agenda

In June 2020, Klaus Schwab said the next agenda (following C-19) for the WEF was ‘the call to build a greener, smarter, fairer world as we seek a way out of the COVID-19 pandemic’. Clearly, he is attaching their Green Agenda to the Great Reset at the heart of the WEF.

I used to teach green agenda themes as a Geography teacher in schools, such as the dangers of land degradation due to salination (groundwater salt coming to the surface through greedy farmers trying to get too much from the land) and desertification (the spread of deserts due to over-cultivation or overgrazing by domesticated animals).  So, I am not against green principles — far from it.

But my huge concern here is that it is an unelected global organisation engineering this, rather than local communities taking responsibility for their own futures and being good global stewards as well, by applying sustainable practices that ensure both local and global future viability.

I believe that good education and good national leadership in touch with their people can make this work in a realistic fashion, in a democratic way. We don’t need global multinationals and their ambassadors to dictate our local agenda.

Climate Change

Again Klaus Schwab, commenting on the impact of C-19 in 2020, said, ‘Climate change could be the next global disaster, with even more dramatic consequences.’ I am not entering into a discussion as to whether or not the world’s climates are being negatively impacted by anthropogenic factors. Rather, I am drawing our attention to how core this belief is to the heart of the WEF.

Note that Schwab is predicting climate change to be ‘another global disaster’, not a ‘victory’ or a ‘solution’. It seems to me that, as with C-19, the WEF is planning for climate change to be the next ‘weapon of fear’ to seek to manipulate the people into submitting to their global plans.

Let me put it to you: if anthropomorphic climate change is a reality, surely every clear-thinking community would have been on to this decades ago. Why should it need a non-elected think tank from Switzerland to dictate to the world their remedy? That would make them super smart! Notice how the features of this next ‘disaster’ are all levers in the Great Reset.

Cut Mass Transit

One of the most disruptive impacts of the C-19 countermeasures was the closure of borders, both state and national. Cruise ships at anchor and aeroplanes in storage in the Australian desert. The WEF was rejoicing at the remarkable cut in emissions that their shutting down of economies had achieved in such record time.

Pre C-19, mass international tourism, international business travel, mass migration of peoples from one nation to another were the order of the day. This was the icing on the cake of globalism! But post C-19, the WEF doesn’t want us to return to normal.

From my perspective, the ‘working from home’ scenario will make a huge dent in mass transit, locally and internationally; already, nation after nation are now struggling with labour shortages as the mass migration of people has been stopped (except on the Mexico/US border and across the English Channel into the United Kingdom).

Human surveillance and the removal of privacy for the greater good

We had to show our passes to buy a meal, go to the movies and enter certain buildings. All this was to track a ‘pandemic’ that killed no more than the background death toll, unless you add in the effects of doctors being banned from upholding their Hippocratic Oath and the adverse effects of the C-19 injections.

The only rationale I can see for the human surveillance and the stripping away of our privacy has been to drip-feed fear into the people; while the people are terrified, they are compliant. I can see an argument that a community might agree to forgo some privileges for the greater good, if they can really see a tangible effect and then it would be for a limited time only.

Here in Australia, the rules, prior to C-19, gave the government the right to declare a state of emergency during which they could suspend the normal democratic processes. This could be for an actual invasion or a catastrophic natural disaster, but these emergency powers could not be in place for more than two weeks. Our governments have voted themself a free pass for two years, and some states are trying to get that extended!

Consider what is in the C-19 injections. There are ongoing legal battles to have full transparency regarding what the people are being coerced to have injected into their bodies. What’s in them has been the subject of countless investigations from around the world.

Now, in a sense I can understand, these injections were brought to market at record speeds, so perhaps we can concede that the data sheets did not keep up with the shipments. However, there are two aspects of the constituents that concern me: the apparent potential for actual human surveillance in these vials — Big Pharma has not denied this; and evidence that the body’s natural immune system is compromised, creating the need for repeated injections, boosters. These are two key reasons why I will never take a shot.

Renewable Energy

The desire for renewable energy goes back thousands of years. For example, I grew up marvelling at the wonders of the Snowy Hydro Scheme. The way that water can be pumped back up the mountain at night when we slept, to be released again when we needed it in the day; it was perfect, even more or less drought-proof!

Today it’s no longer government policy driving this push for a fully renewable energy supply system. Now, nearly every energy-producing and consuming corporation I see advertising is championing ‘net-zero’; together they are creating a mindset that says, that if we are not thinking ‘renewable’, we are irresponsible or even a danger to society.

Who is talking about the extinction of rare birds caught in wind turbines — the WWF? Who is talking about the huge costs in energy and raw materials to build the wind turbines, and what do we do when the wind doesn’t blow?

Who is talking about the costs of recycling solar panels, nearly all made in China at a huge energy cost? Who is standing up for the children in Africa exploited and killed to extract the lithium for our batteries, sometimes called ‘blood batteries’?

I think there should be much more open discussion and debate about options. As it is, we seem to get fixated on one side of the story, that at a stroke removes any platform for discussion and debate. When that is stripped away, the principles of the scientific method are set aside, critical thinking is seen as conspiracy theory, and before you know it, democracy is dead.

What’s next? The culture as we know it

Culture can be described as “an umbrella term which encompasses the social behaviour, institutions, and norms found in human societies, as well as the knowledge, beliefs, arts, laws, customs, capabilities, and habits of the individuals in these groups.” (Wikipedia)

For the purposes of this essay, I am thinking of the culture as the stage, the backdrop, the platform on which the World Economic Forum (WEF) is producing its epic production before us, the audience, but all of us are also the actors in the play! We have painted the set and brought out the props at the direction of the WEF.

Mass Formation Psychosis

The play opens with the mass formation psychosis of the audience and the actors. Years before C-19, governments around the world were engaging social science originations to alter the way their populations thought about a range of issues. They were called ‘nudge unites’.

These unites did their own research on their effectiveness, and one key recommendation they reported back to governments was to say that applying lessons from science to policy without rigorous testing is not desirable — nor is it easy to get away with. They knew they were in the wrong: they were manipulating society for the governments’ ends, but at the same time they also warned governments that they might get found out — and they have!

Now, what do we think about that? These nudge unites have replicated like frogspawn in the last two years, and I would argue that the vast majority of the western world has been put under a type of hypnosis. They are now conditioned to hear one message and one message only. Anything that does not accord with the message, subconsciously, they can’t process at all, or some will come right out and declare it to be misinformation or disinformation.

Where did this language come from? No one ever used this language as I was growing up, and I certainly can’t recall hearing it prior to C-19. There is information or there isn’t. It’s factual or it’s not. It seems to me that one of the byproducts of mass formation psychosis is that we have conflated the opinions about the facts with the facts. People can no longer differentiate commentary from content.

After all, science is all about proffering ‘alternative explanations’. The fun is in the testing and analysis to see if the new ideas are plausible. No healthy, intelligent culture can ever claim to have the sum of all truth, but, apparently, under mass formation psychosis, some think they can!

Big Government

Now I think it’s probably appropriate to consider governments, as they, through taxpayers, have bankrolled the nudge unites to support their agendas, which in turn have channelled the WEF agendas.

One of the first things I noticed early in the C-19 episode was the unified language and timing coming from western governments across the globe. It was as if they all had the same run sheet with the same bottom line: big government. They said this is an ‘international emergency and we are the single source of truth, so follow our directives and we will all come through this together.’

Early on, I started to write to my federal member, and I have persisted for two years now, asking for a meeting or at least a phone call discussion. My representative in parliament has not once agreed to meet with me or talk with me. This tells me that government has become too big; their overreach, I would argue, is nothing short of tyrannical dictatorship.

In addition to failing to talk to a constituent, they have controlled what drugs and drug protocols doctors are allowed to prescribe when dealing with the sick; they have controlled doctors’ social media posts when they dared to criticise the government narrative; caused thousands to lose their jobs, particularly in medicine, teaching and the aviation industries; broken and divided families, restricted free citizens’ freedom of movement and freedom of expression; and printed trillions of dollars with no plans to repay. Some of the most lasting memories I will carry all my life are seeing the criminality of some of the police actions against peaceful demonstrations, simply asking to be heard and asking for their jobs back.

I did not vote for a single one of their C-19 measures. At a stroke, big government stripped away from me my personal responsibility to look after myself and those in my community; above all, they stripped away democracy, the hallmark of our culture for thousands of years.

I am not laying the blame on big government per se; they too have been the actors in their own play, I believe that the majority of big government are under mass formation psychosis just like their audience, so my line would be, ‘forgive them, for they know not what know what they do’ (Luke 23:34), but from here on, let’s ensure we hold them accountable.

Poll-Driven Government

I grew up with the belief that a political party’s true culture was set in stone. You could vote for a party with the confidence that you knew what you would get if they were elected. Sadly, those days of certainty are over. Now it seems self-evident that governments simply respond to their polling data, rather than their policy positions.

So, with governments’ triggering the nudge unites to spread the single narrative energised by fear, it is not surprising that the polls quickly began to show that the people approved of the governments’ measures to counter the C-19 ‘situation’ (notice I am not calling it a pandemic, as that’s an emotive term and I believe the data does not support it).

I would argue that the C-19 situation has been arbitrarily extended simply because of the ‘success’ of the nudge unites, which in turn fed right into the polls, that in turn drove the governments’ action. A circular argument, a self-fulfilling prophecy.

To break the cycle here in Australia, I believe the people need to rise up and send a resounding message to federal and state parliaments that they don’t want a repeat of the last two years under any circumstances. This is an extremely big ask if mass formation psychosis has really taken hold, as I think it has. My writing this essay is my attempt to wake someone up from their hypnosis, and I pray they will, in turn, wake up others.

Terrain or Germ Theory

I think that my understanding of this aspect of medical science is second only to my grasp of the WEF’s agendas in terms of importance! This is pivotal in my understanding of the big picture. Halfway through 2020, thanks to Dr Samantha Bailey, a medical doctor from New Zealand, I understood the difference between terrain and germ theory. Simplified, it goes like this:

Terrain theory is the older concept; literally, it refers to the ‘terrain’ we live on, the landscape, the environment, the atmosphere we breathe. If our environment is healthy, we have a healthy balanced diet, clean water, and an atmosphere free from mould spores and rich in vitamin D, our immune system will fend off most ailments and we should be able to live a healthy long life.

Germ theory, on the other hand, believes that the environment is innately full of germs and that specific germs cause specific diseases,, and specific viruses transmit specific pandemics, such as C-19.

Well, most medicine around the world for thousands of years was practised on the principle of terrain theory. Medications were derived from the natural world, plants and animals; believe it or not, some were made from snake venom.

Then in the twentieth century, pharmaceutical companies discovered that they could make synthetic drugs in vast quantities, extremely cheaply from petrochemicals. So, in order to maintain their market for drugs as people’s environments and diets improved dramatically, medicine changed its paradigm from terrain theory to germ theory.

Now, in western nations, nearly all medical professionals are trained under germ theory and know very little of terrain theory. They are now trained to look for one drug, hopefully a new, expensive one, to counteract every germ or virus they find, and the more the merrier.

We now have generations growing up obsessed with cleanliness and who never acknowledge that our bodies are the happy home for millions and millions of germs, and that a healthy gut is home to over 100 trillion bacteria.

I believe the prevalence of germ theory over terrain theory has enabled the fear of C-19 to grip the world so effectively and to drive millions to get the untried, untested C-19 injection as their only insurance against what they perceive to be a surefire killer disease. I would go further to say that yes, the world has lived through a ‘pandemic’ these last two years, the ‘pandemic of the fear of C-19’.

Big Pharma

Many excuse the profit margin of Big Pharma over the last two years as a necessary investment to defeat this deadly enemy. But let’s look at it another way. Of all the various sectors of the world’s economies, Big Pharma and Big Tech would be the standout sectors to have made massive profits while all the others have made tragic losses.

Big Pharma got all western democracies to underwrite liability for their ‘vaccines’ (not the first-time mind you). Then they contracted each government to purchase millions of doses, paid for by taxpayers, without their agreement at the polling booth. Then it became the various governments’ responsibility to ‘market’ these ‘vaccines’ before their use-by date. So Big Pharma did not even have to spend a dollar on advertising!

It is my contention that this whole scenario started decades ago when Dr Anthony Fauci started his career in ‘public health’ which has become such a monolith, a gigantic organisation that sits between governments and Big Pharma. They collect their lifeblood of grants from governments to develop a constant stream of new synthetic therapeutics, made from petroleum to combat every new germ they can find. Then they get the governments to buy their products to inject whole populations, because, they say, if they don’t ‘immunise’ everyone, the germ may escape and wipe out humanity. It is a remarkable ruse.

I ask you, why does government need to control health? They are merely the elected representatives of the people; they have no more expertise than those they purport to represent. Surely the best place for health management of a population is in the doctor’s surgery, the private consultation between doctor and patient.

The doctor is the expert, and they know the needs of their patient. Then, if the doctor advises a particular treatment, the patient has the choice of accepting it or going off for a second opinion. For me, governments’ conflicts of interest with Big Pharma disqualify them from any involvement in managing public health.

I hear you say: well, when there is a global or national disaster, governments must have a responsibility to their people to support them and manage situations as best they can, and that might mean global or national health measures.

Yes, I tentatively agree, for a genuine pandemic. However, the World Health Organization (WHO) changed its definition of ‘pandemic’ so that it could declare the C-19 situation a ‘pandemic’. Also, I think we should consider the WEF and Big Pharma’s agendas, and particularly consider the numbers of deaths attributed to C-19 (directly ‘from’ the disease, as opposed to ‘with’ the disease) and compare these with the natural death rates to determine ‘excess’ mortality.

My read of the statistics (we must be extremely sceptical about whose data we use) is that C-19 has not been a pandemic and therefore there can be no justification for governments’ partnership with Big Pharma.

Legacy Media

Old media, or legacy media, are the mass media institutions that predominated prior to the Information Age; particularly print media, film studios, music studios, advertising agencies, radio broadcasting, and television. (Wikipedia)

When I was a boy, I had the highest respect for the media, newsprint, television, and radio. I never had to wonder, was their coverage fair and balanced? Today, in particular through the C-19 saga, I have come to disrespect them almost completely.

My main concerns are: firstly, they have ceased to ask the hard questions, they have stopped challenging and simply parrot a single narrative, which is almost exclusively the governments’ narrative. This is simply propaganda and most in democratic nations would never suspect that their major media outlets were actually transmitting propaganda under the payroll of their governments, but they are.

Secondly, my concern is that there is no longer a clear distinction between valid opinion (everyone is entitled to their own perspective) and solid concrete facts. They are both presented together, so that opinion becomes fact in the minds of the hearer, the consumer, especially when repeated time and time again (one of the strategies of mass formation psychosis). Related to this concern is the selection of the opinion and ‘facts’ to be presented. It is such an effective strategy to saturate the news with stories that ‘support’ the official narrative and leave, unreported, anything that might contradict the story.

So, what do we do? I have noted that this year, legacy media ratings have been plummeting in many nations. Isn’t that interesting? Does it signify that populations are waking up to the propaganda they are being fed? I hope so. But when people only hear one song, it’s extremely hard for them to believe there could ever be another one.

Also consider the cancel culture rampant in western ‘democracies’, along with the increasing number of censorship issues, where for example, people can’t question the effectiveness of the ‘vaccines’ on their YouTube channels. Surely the time has come for a new narrative, a transparent story that can peacefully accommodate difference and debate, while leaving the audience to make their minds up themselves.

Medical mandates and discrimination

Here in Australia, our prime minister assured us in the middle of last year that there would be no medical mandates. However, what transpired, I can only describe as surreal. The states started issuing their own mandates, and federal parliament did nothing to stop them.

Further, individual businesses and corporations started setting their own mandates, often more draconian than the states’ mandates. Then when some of the states lifted some of their restrictions, some businesses and corporations kept theirs!

My view on all this is that federal parliament struck up the first few lines of the song, only to be echoed with a loud crescendo by the states, all the while stoking the fires of fear in the people. So, in recognition of people’s fears, perhaps responding to opinion polls, businesses and corporations started doing the ‘honourable thing, keeping their people safe’, when all along it was simply an element of mass formation psychosis responding to the propaganda repeatedly pumped out by the legacy media.

The medical mandates resulted in thousands losing their jobs as they refused to take the C-19 injection. Whole sectors of the economy are now devasted by staff shortages, but the legacy media don’t make the connection as I have. Often these shortages are on top of preexisting shortages, for example in teaching, and the problem is compounded by the lack of foreign students and new immigrants who used to fill so many roles

My chief concern has been the acceptance of medical discrimination as fair and reasonable by a culture that has fought for decades to stand up for minorities and the less fortunate. Why is it now acceptable to discriminate on the grounds of medical history, while it’s not acceptable to discriminate against race or gender?

I go further. The proponents of medical discrimination say it’s for the greater good. That’s an interesting shift. Where has the doctrine of human rights and bodily autonomy gone now? Where has the parental responsibility to their children gone now that governments can coerce minors to take medical procedures?

This flies in the face of my belief in the sacredness and immeasurable value of every individual. I can never condone medical mandates. As I said earlier, I believe that medical details and any treatment are a personal private matter, only for the consultation room with doctor and patient.

Adverse reactions and premature deaths

The C-19 injections are a novel ‘immunisation’ that has never undergone the normal trial periods and testing previously required for such interventions in healthy individuals. Every medication I have seen in the past and even today, comes with a huge list of potential side effects, and instructions to cease taking immediately if any of these reactions occur and to see your medical practitioner.

Not so with the C-19 injection. There was no list of potential side effects, and what’s more, there was no way that the patient could read what the active ingredients were. This is extraordinarily unprecedented.

In May and June of 2021 when the C-19 injections were first being rolled out, the legacy media had wall-to-wall coverage of adverse effects from all over the country. There was hardly a broadcast without one! Then, as if a switch was flicked, they stopped reporting them and instead extolled the injections virtues and paraded the take-up rates as if they were AFL match scores.

My perception today is that the numbers of adverse events have been dramatically under-reported to the medical authorities; doctors are extremely reluctant to attribute any event to the C-19 injection and compensation is extremely hard to extract, as the medical profession has not been allowed to separate the government narrative from the facts.

My main areas of concern are neurological damage, particularly in young men, an inordinate number of miscarriages and premature deaths due to heart attacks. Surely these are sufficient grounds to question the C-19 injections? Apparently not — the government ads still play urging us to collect our booster shots. This does not add up; it only supports my contention that the WEF’s agenda is the driving force.

The better way: The culture we can know now

Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said:
“People of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious.
For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship,
I even found an altar with this inscription: to an unknown god.
So you are ignorant of the very thing you worship —
and this is what I am going to proclaim to you.”
(Acts 17:22, 23, New International Version)

Paul in Athens. What a great picture. He perceives that the Greeks are ‘very religious’. It’s my perception that today, most people are ‘very religious’ — they have centred their faith in big government, and by implication in the WEF and in the legacy media to keep them ‘informed’ of new developments, as the backstories of these three entities add up to another religion, a religion without God.

How am I defining a religion? A set of beliefs that dictate actions, energised by a faith that it works. It is my contention that the majority of the western world’s populations, that have succumbed to mass formation psychosis, have subconsciously signed up to a type of religion; let’s call it the WEF’s agenda for short.

There are so many great visions within the WEF’s agenda and it’s so uplifting to be part of a movement that receives such rounded applause on nearly every stage. But what if the heart of it all is rotten to the core, and the end is not going to turn out well for the world’s peoples?

You may have noticed, as we have travelled along this journey together, I have not referenced the world’s population much. More often than not, it’s the western world’s democratic nations that seem to be the primary target for the WEF’s agenda.

China and Asia tend to be more of a law unto themselves and have not let the WEF into their lives to any large extent. The same goes for Africa, which often could not afford Big Pharma’s price tag anyway. I am also aware of a number of African nations standing up to the WEF over the decades. Naturally, this did not get much airtime from the legacy media, but their rejection of Big Pharma has been spectacular nonetheless. I know of no western democracies that have rejected the narrative from national government leadership down, like they have.

God’s calling

Where do we centre, or focus, our faith? I say, as a Christian, in God who was before time, created all things, is outside of time, the infinite and the one who calls each one of us into His plan and purpose.

God is completely left outside of the WEF agenda — there is no acknowledgement or recognition of the creator or the created. For them, we are simply data, a resource and a consumer. The WEF’s agenda is most definitely predictable and is dependent on everyone’s submissive compliance for success. If we were in a dark tunnel or if we were blind, we might, for a season, trust another to guide us out into the light, but I am sure God does not want that for our permanent way of life.

I don’t believe we should ever lead a divided life. By that I mean, the spiritual, eternal life on the one hand and the natural, finite on the other, as if the latter is the vehicle for the former. No, for me, as a Christian, it is one life now, it’s spiritual and natural and it’s eternal; at present I am on the earth, but this is not my eternal home. So, if my life is not divided, everything in my life is both spiritual and natural at the same time. I find the WEF agenda is incompatible with God’s agenda and would demand I lead a divided life if I were to try to accommodate both. I find them irreconcilable.

God has given us a sound mind, the power of discernment between right and wrong, between the right way to live and the wrong way, the best way to serve others and the way of selfishness, and between large and small-mindedness.

I believe God wants us all to approach life with Him at the centre and Him as our focus as we individually seek to walk in His calling for our lives. His perfect love casts out fear, and He is light so we can walk in full transparency, testing the validity of all the voices we encounter along the way. We don’t need the government narrative, translated into propaganda, to direct our steps; we simply need to follow God wherever He leads us.

Romans 13:1-7 — Submit to Governments or to God

These verses from Paul are extremely complex and they have often been referenced by Christians these last two years in the context of the C-19 story. Some Christians have vehemently championed this passage saying that there is no debate, all authority is God-given and Christians must obey that authority even if it brings pain.

On the other hand, some Christians acknowledge that this scripture does say that we should submit to authority, but only if that authority aligns with God’s will (Acts 5:29). What they are claiming there is a hierarchy, and God always trumps man.

An oft-quoted narrative in this context is the dilemma faced by the German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer at the end of World War II. He saw what Hitler and his regime were doing to millions of Jews and he had the opportunity to join a plot to assassinate Hitler. What would you have done? Well, he did join the conspiracy, but it failed, and he was executed for his part in it.

Returning to the subject of this essay, the big picture, what does Romans 13:1-7 say about it? My approach has been to seek the ‘peace of God’ at every step, over every chapter and with every mandate. I will give three examples of how I have used this principle.

  1. When I saw that the legacy media were not giving a balanced coverage of the facts, coupled with the rise of press and public censorship, I turned away from ‘following’ their stories as best I could. I would leave the room when the news came on or I would mute the sound if I had the remote! I was not submitting to their authority.
  2. When I saw that the statistics for C-19 deaths were being conflated by including any who died ‘with’ covid as well as those who died ‘of’ covid, I took a long hard look at all the statistics. I was not believing everything that was being said.
  3. When I understood mass formation psychosis, I went to prayer as to how I might save the one from their hypnosis; fully aware that for some, to wake them from their trance would be highly traumatic and most likely result in the release of a good deal of anger and resentment to start with at least.

Perhaps the hardest application of Romans for me has been to acknowledge that I will never submit to a C-19 injection even if it means I am taken away and locked up. If the ‘vaccine mandates’ never lift, I am resigned to never see my family in England again and I will never be able to travel again, one of my greatest joys on earth.

The currency of fear or the riches of faith

I don’t fear death; I don’t recall ever fearing death since I became a Christian in August 1972. The use of the ‘case numbers’, the ‘hospitalisation statistics’ and the ‘deaths’ were all, in my mind, used to create and maintain the fear of C-19. In 2021, this fear was also used to drive the C-19 injection rates.

It never captivated me, in fact, it angered me that governments would stoop so low as to seek to manipulate their people. I have not walked across to the other side of the pavement out of fear, but occasionally I have, out of respect for others’ fear of me! I am heartbroken by those who are still captivated by fear; for example, those walking outside with a mask on, is classic evidence of their fear.

For me, I encourage myself to let perfect love cast out all fear (1 John 4:18). That does not mean I should be irresponsible with myself and loved ones, but I do believe I can focus on ‘looking after myself and others’. Aiming for and maintaining the highest level of fitness I can, eating a balanced diet in moderation, having a good intake of vitamins C and D and plenty of healthy stress-free recreation.

I will never forget the scenes on Bondi Beach, Sydney, in autumn 2020, when the police would swoop on crowds on the beach and swimmers in the sea! The beach goers were doing the best thing to counter the new threat by getting out and exercising in the sun and the sea, yet the authorities condemned their actions and the legacy media, backing the authorities, ridiculed those with common sense!

My experience of the C-19 story became much easier when I realised it was a man-made pandemic of fear and that it was created to facilitate the WEF’s agenda. I was determined not to be a part of it but rather to be part of the opposition, fighting against it. My faith kicked in that God was going to win in the end.

Jim’s Stand

This year I started a channel on Telegram, called Jim’s Stand. It had struck me that we lead busy lives with pressures all around and often we can’t see the ground being taken away from under our feet until we no longer have solid ground to stand on. I have lived long enough to see the rate of change accelerate beyond my wildest imagination.

I see the C-19 story as a tidal wave seeking to demolish all the principles I seek to uphold and by which I direct my life. Yes, that’s dramatic language, but that’s what it is: it’s complete destruction, reset, so that ‘they’ can ‘build back better’ in their own eyes, a utopia that feeds their dreams but is dead set against the Christian faith and the church of Jesus Christ.

For most of my life, I have been apolitical. In 2014, I became an Australian citizen and had the honour of being inducted into the Australian culture by my own local federal member in a private ceremony. I guess I have followed politics quite closely since then, as I now ‘have’ to vote, but in the last two years, I have progressed from a tentative first gear to a very prayerful top speed in my political awareness!

I haven’t joined any political party and don’t intend to, but I am passionate about ensuring my vote is the way that the Lord wants me to vote, and I would encourage everyone to be serious about their politics, as its one way we can all make a stand for what is right. Our single vote, you may say, is a drop in the ocean, but I believe every drop counts in God’s economy. He does not need a majority to change things; He simply needs men and women of faith to make a stand.

Personal Responsibility

One of the stand-out features of the various state and federal responses to the C-19 story has been the stripping away of our personal responsibility and its replacement with state responsibility. I have always taught my children, and my students, to take more and more responsibility as they grow in experience and maturity. I believe the mark of a truly mature man and woman is their personal responsibility.

Governments around the world have sidelined our intelligence and our capacity for critical thinking, and simply told us what we can and cannot do. They have rarely given any justification for their ‘rules’ other than to say it’s for the ‘greater good’ or we are ‘all in this together’. These platitudes do not respect the people.

A very small minority of western nations and the odd American state ‘kept business as usual’ over these last two years and urged their people to take personal responsibility. If you do the statistical analysis now and compare these nations and states with the rest that had their personal responsibility and their livelihoods stripped away, there is no empirical evidence that they did any worse; in fact quite often, they did better, and they have had fewer family breakdowns and crushed economies to rebuild.

I believe in small government. I believe that people were God-created, highly intelligent men and women. If you expect them to rise to the occasion and practice responsibility, by and large they will. But if you have to define and control every single aspect of individuals’ lives, they actually grow less responsible and more and more dependent on more and more rules and regulations as they can’t think for themselves. Big government is so inefficient, so expensive, and so prone to being taken over by tyrannical dictatorships where even the people’s thought-life is censored.

I believe we should all take personal responsibility and resist at all costs the intrusions of the state into our lives.

What is the real C-19 story?

We have all experienced the outworking of the C-19 story over the last two years; however, I believe it started much earlier than that. We can all tell our own story of these events; mine is a reflection based on prayer, study and time. I don’t expect my story to be the complete big picture; I am sure some parts of the picture will benefit from more light being shed on those hidden features; but I hope it will cast out some fears and bring some joy and hope to others.

The WEF has been planning this for ages — they have had many simulated pandemics, but the C-19 story was a meticulous planned real-life drama, designed to create compliance from the people by the creation of fear.

Influenza has always claimed tens of thousands of lives every year. Every year, a number of new strains emerge. So, the WEF decided to call out SARS-CoV-2 and named it Covid-19, which originated in Wuhan, China, in late 2019.

The key to the creation of the ‘pandemic’ was the employment of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. It was invented in 1983 by the American biochemist Kary Mullis, but it was never intended to be the diagnostic tool for an infection. However, that’s what the majority of nations have used to ‘track’ the spread of the so-called C-19 in populations.

There are two problems with the use of the PCR. Firstly, a C-19 virus has never been isolated, so what the PCR tests detect is simply the presence of a ‘minute fragment’ of genetic material that could have come from anywhere, and most significantly could indicate the subject had had a virus in the past but was now no longer sick.

Secondly, it was simply used on a daily basis to report ‘the number of positive cases’. That number was in fact a much better indication of the level of fear in a population than the spread of the disease. The more fearful a community, the more would go and get tested and the higher would be the number of cases. This, in turn, fed the fear factor and more came forward for testing, and so the ‘pandemic of fear’ was born, a brilliant strategy.

At this point, you may say that in some countries, some cities, there was certainly an ‘excess mortality’ in evidence. Yes, I would agree, but first, remember the way that the statistics have been gathered and used. During the C-19 story, doctors were forced to record as a ‘Covid death’ anyone who died of anything in the last two years if they also had a positive PCR test. This ‘deception’ is coming out now, but the spread of ingenuous statistics has already had its desired effect, namely, to build the fear factor.

The other thing to note is that the medical profession has been ‘forbidden’ to use various tried and tested cheap medications that had already come off patent; as the ‘authorities’ needed to be able to say there was nothing to fight this ‘killer’. So, governments said, here you are, have this money (from taxpayers) to develop a vaccine as quickly as you can. Meanwhile, thousands were untreated and sadly died.

Further, notably in the USA, the medical profession was ‘instructed’ to use Remdesivir, an intravenous drug with a huge literature of adverse effects already. It is believed that the excess deaths in the USA can be attributed to the lack of use of the proven drugs and the criminal use of Remdesivir.

So the C-19 story was the outworking of a plan by the WEF to catapult their various agendas on a world stage that would never naturally agree to such central control, such global governance and such tyranny. The plan simply used naturally occurring influenza that always used to spread quite rapidly around the world, particularly in aeroplanes with the mass movement of people.

What of the ‘vaccines’ then? Haven’t they worked? My short retort is no. A report came out this week that AstraZeneca had a 1% effect of reducing the impact of C-19, while Pfizer had a zero effect. After two years the severity of any influenza wans with time and the population do build up immunity, so to claim the ‘vaccines’ have worked is disingenuous — such a claim can only be used to stimulate more fear and drive further uptake of boosters.

The longer-term impact of the C-19 injections on the world’s population will be to confirm their addiction to germ theory and the belief that the only way forward for a safe long life is to have more and more injections as more and more ‘viruses’ and their variants are discovered. For me, the simple message has been ‘get fit, exercise well, eat well and enjoy the sunshine’.

Perhaps the most criminal aspect of the ‘vaccines’ is the underreporting of ‘adverse effects’ including death. In the past, a fraction of the adverse effects would have halted the rollout of an injection, but for this one, no one seems in the slightest concerned, certainly the media and the politicians aren’t concerned.

Another aspect of the C-19 injections is that the marketing/coercion has now reached children, the group least likely to be affected badly by influenza. And perhaps the worst aspect of this is that in some parts of the world, parents’ responsibility is being sidelined, as children are now allowed to take the jab without their parents’ approval.

Where should we go from here? I would encourage us all to let perfect love cast out all fear (1 John 4:18). C-19 was a variety of influenza that you and your medical practitioner know how to manage. Don’t take any C-19 injections, they are useless (at best), and don’t take any more if you have already one or two.

Look to God for your calling, His plan and purpose in your life and run after it with all your heart. Be alert to and prepared for the strategies of the enemy and his scheming agendas, and don’t let him take another inch of your inheritance.

Anyone who now advocates for a ‘new normal’ needs to examine the basis for such a claim. I believe it is entirely baseless.

___

Photo by Yan Krukov.

Thank the Source

We Are Witnessing the Birth of a New Religion

We Are Witnessing the Birth of a New Religion

Transgender ideology is becoming sacrosanct, taken as a fact and not permitted to be questioned or criticised. It is treated as a sacred religion by those who actually believe in it. This has implications for all of society.

I don’t think most people believe that “trans women are women”, even when they say it.

I think most people who say it are afraid not to say it.

And then there are a small group of people who say it to make those who don’t say it afraid; very afraid.

“Trans women are women. Trans women are women. Trans women are women.”

Woke Confession

If you’re on social media, you would have seen everyone from the United Nations to US President Joe Biden and London Mayor Sadiq Khan repeat the phrase.

“Trans women are women. Trans women are women. Trans women are women.”

It’s like a religious confession; a sacrament of woke, if you will. When you say it, you prove that you have abandoned truth in order to fully embrace the new religion. You are a believer.

Repeating the woke liturgy is a way of signalling to everyone else that you have converted and so you won’t be any bother.

No matter how ridiculous or absurd things become, you won’t question anything. You’re a loyal member of the congregation of woke. You’ll go along to get along. And don’t the Emperor’s new clothes look good!

Total Control

If you secretly yearn to control and boss others around, the “trans women are women” confession is especially appealing.

Imagine having the power to bully people on social media or to get them fired from their job for not agreeing with obvious falsities.

Up is down! And if you don’t disagree, you’re a bigot who should be run out of town.

Imagine having that kind of power!

Forced to Lie

In George Orwell’s famous novel, 1984, Winston Smith is repeatedly asked how many fingers his captors are holding up. He is tortured every time he gives the correct answer. But he is rewarded when he gives the incorrect answer.

He is trained to lie and only allowed to get on with his life when his rulers are confident that he has bought the lie and will not deviate from it.

Consider what is happening today …

  • Claim 1: A man cannot become a woman
  • Claim 2: A man can become a woman
  • Claim 1 is obviously true, but if you say it, you may lose your job.
  • Claim 2 is obviously a lie, but if you say it, you may get hired and/or promoted.

Most people are going to stick with Claim 2, right?

I say all of this to say that it’s smart to remember that when you hear someone say “trans women are women”, they probably don’t believe it. Not even a bit.

They are saying it out of fear.

Or they are saying it just to let you know they have power over you. They’re putting you on notice that if you dissent, they will hound you off social media and perhaps ruin your livelihood.

So why not just go along. What’s the big deal? And besides, if it makes people happy, then isn’t going along with it a kind thing to do?

Erosion

Going along with trans ideology is one of the worst things we can do.

If they can make everybody bow down to this foolishness, as they are in the process of doing, then this foolishness will quickly become a sacred creed that no one can question, if indeed it has not become that already.

Our children learn that 1+1=2; ABC is followed by DEF; and “trans women are women”. Within a generation, it becomes impossible to even question. They are taught “trans women are women”, not just as an unquestionable empirical truth but as a moral truth.

This has consequences.

A society that begins with a false premise will arrive at false conclusions and end up with huge contradictions. Terrible decisions will follow.

Girl’s sport will become a pantomime. A man, like Lia Thomas, will win every event. Fellow competitors will applaud while muttering under their breath, “Cheat!”

And within a few years, young girls will realise there is no point in dreaming of playing sport.

Women’s spaces will become unappealing and, increasingly, unsafe, as women are forced to share bathrooms and prison cells and domestic violence shelters with men.

This is already happening.

Fracturing

But there is something yet worse happening that no one is talking about.

Having people repeat the mantra “trans women are women” destroys the moral fabric of the populace.

When you force the population to tell lies — to themselves and to their own children — you weaken their character, and you make them pliable for worse evils.

To say “trans women are women” is to willfully distort reality. When you speak nonsense, you eventually think nonsense.

If cultural elites can make you believe that men can get pregnant or that men can have periods, then they can make you believe anything at all. Anything.

While it’s true that most people don’t believe a man can become a woman, the frightening thing is that the majority are willing to pretend that they believe it. What other untruths might people be prepared to pretend in order to get along?

Where does a society like that end up?

We are witnessing the birth of a new religion and, with it, the potential for all kinds of evil.

__

Originally published at The James Macpherson Report.
Subscribe to his Substack here for daily witty commentary.
Photo by C. Percheron.

Thank the Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)