The True Political Spectrum: Washing Away The Deceptive Left-Wing, Right-Wing Terminology In Favour Of The Reality That Either You Are Free From Government Or You Are Oppressed By Government

In this age, society will always be imperfect at best.

Jesus has not yet assumed his position as King of the nations and consequently there will never be a perfect political and economic system

But let’s remember that we do have a choice about just how bad things can get.

After all, would you prefer the Third Reich and Communism or something a little more freeing?

People literally chose both of those and look how it ended.

Because this is a fallen world, the natural tendency is always towards corruption and the misuse of power. If something good is established in the political and economic realms, it wasn’t achieved without the hard work of people fighting against authoritarian and totalitarian ideologies. 

In essence, someone realised that humanity were made to be free and they fought against those who sought to subdue that freedom in the name of whatever oppressive ideology was popular at the time.

And guess what: nothing has changed!

The contemporary West is in many regards the most successful society ever and most of that can be attributed to the esteemed value of the individual.

Sadly, we are in a significant upheaval where much of what has been gained is currently been stripped away by the corrupt leaders elected by ignorant “useful idiots” who don’t understand their history and consequently cannot see the oppressive future they are ushering in of their own free volition.

As always these days, an understanding of the true political spectrum (ie not the left-right lie where of your two party options, one is always left and one is always right) is absolutely necessary to avoid falling trap to the deceptive language employed by politicians who seek ever more power over society.

The below article from Mr E at Rocking Philosophy is asimple yet astute breakdown of the political into an accurate and useable form: namely the relationship between the size and power of government versus the freedom of the individual.

I find his ending statements the most fascinating as Mr E, an atheist, expresses his desire for a world “where individuals have total autonomy and collectives can only ever be voluntary”. 

If you know anything about the God of the bible, this is exactly what is promised therein.

Don’t get sidetracked with supposed Christian empire in history that committed evil acts or scandals involving the church and paedophilia. I’m not talking about Christians who fail to be like Christ, or in plenty of cases, people who only claimed the name of “Christian” – I’m referring to what God says the church is and will be perfectly when Jesus rules over the nations as King.

Humanity will be perfectly free, from sin and even death, (with “free” meaning free to love, not free to act selfishly and dangerously) and the church is by default a collective that you can only become part of by your free will, otherwise known as voluntary.

Indeed, this is why we choose freely to become Christians – because our sin is killing us and we want to be made like Jesus, so wing God freely promises to all those who say yes to him.

The True Political Spectrum

Having made a video about the left-right paradigm I feel the yearning to further expound on a more accurate representation of what the left and right truly are. I’ve been researching the concept of the political spectrum for quite some time, and the political compass appears to be the most widely used:

I can no longer accept the accuracy of this chart, since collectivists are always authoritarian to some degree. They restrict individual liberty, and define rights via collective approval. This is the epitome of totalitarianism, brushing aside individuals for collective goals. This is not only oppressive to the individual, but also leads to problems like regulatory capture. Where would the ‘too big to fail’ bankers be today without state funded bailouts, bad debts passed onto the people via money printing and inflation?

Some might argue that if the banks failed then there would have been chaos. This is the fault of policies allowing a small number to dictate economic activity, and tilt this in their favour. The ‘too big to fail’ bankers didn’t care

about losses because they knew that central banks were there to insure them in the event of failure. There is no way to prevent this sort of monopoly under collectivism, since power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Therefore it’s better to have a system where mistakes cannot be accommodated for with bailouts and ponzi schemes.

Before a more accurate diagram of the present political spectrum can be given it’s important to be aware of what democracy truly is. Democracy is a collectivist ideology that defines rights via the ballot box. This is the same throughout the democratic world. True, there is a far stronger Lockean inspired culture of individualism in the United States, but still democracy has the same problems wherever one goes, and it’s worked wonders for the expansion of socialism. It saddens me that two world wars were fought in the 20th century, and still socialism could not be kept at bay. While fascism, which is simply National Socialism, has been denigrated as the true face of evil, the same cannot be said for international socialism, otherwise known as communism.

If by now you need to be told that Hitler, fascism, and Nazism, are all socialist ideologies driven by state protectionism and nationalism, then the chances are you’re a communist, or an admirer of Marx. There’s always the strong possibility you swallowed the blue pill of government education that teaches people that the Nazis were far-right, even though they controlled the means of production via state regulated corporations, and restricted property rights. If you need any of this confirmed then I have already made videos called “National & International Socialism” and “Nazis Vs Marxists”.

Nothing seems to make a Marxist and a communist angrier than the unrevised fact that fascism and communism are two sides of the same coin. Fascism obsesses over race, while communism endlessly deals with class, but both demand adherence to authority. Hence they are both totalitarian. These two great evils have fought for dominance throughout the 20th century, and today we have a society where democracy is a perpetual battle for control of production and property rights via either the fascist or communist models.

Corporatism itself is a fascist ideology, where the means of production is manipulated by regulation defined by the state. The differences between this and communist control of production is something communists will contest ad nauseum. But they are semantical issues that ignore the fact that corporations could never exist without state policies of corporate personhood. Under laissez-faire, corporations would just be businesses, like any other. The state however benefits from corporations collecting taxes and controlling society on the behalf of bureaucrats, like feudal lords herding peasants on farmlands under feudalism.

With all this in mind we can now begin to see that we only live in one half of a paradigm made up of collectivism and individualism. Presently we live entirely within the collectivist half, where international socialism and National Socialism reside. Here is what this looks like:

It may seem very unfair to label conservatives as fascists, but this only occurs because the right-wing political choice under democracy is merely a corporatist and nationalistic alternative. Conservatism as an ideology is predominantly based around questioning change, since change may not necessarily lead to good things. Therefore I am not inclined to believe by any stretch of the imagination that conservatives are fascists per se. Admittedly they are more authoritarian than many libertarians. But they are always looking to create a society of personal accountability and minimal statism, which is far more than can be said for any socialist, obsessed with absolute control of society.

Conservatives are often associated with organised religion. Organised religion can be very problematic when it merges with the state. This is called theocracy, and is just another form of collectivism. It is not however compulsory to be religious if you are a conservative, and many conservatives are atheists. Having cleared this up it’s much easier to understand why modern right-wing parties have been lumbered in with fascists, due to their big government military spending and corporate welfare policies. Saying that, the term “far-right” is a smokescreen, since fascists are only far-right collectivists, not far right on a broader political spectrum, which looks like this:

Here the totalitarian ideologies, be it national or international socialism, are on the far left. As we progress to the right we pass all ideologies that demand adherence to the state, like democratic political parties. The middle is obviously the centrist position, though I would call this sitting on the fence. The first position to the right is libertarianism. Modern ‘purist’ libertarians believe in a state that only comprises of military, courts, and police, protecting natural rights instead of defining them (note: left-libertarians are merely communists, using dialectic to reframe terminology). This shows why libertarians are on the right, since they actively work towards a limited state, and democracy would not be a legitimate method to infringe upon the natural rights of the individual. These ideas are defined by such philosophers as John Locke, Ayn Rand, and of course the Austrian economists.

The far-right position is stateless anarchy. In a world of anarchy the individual is sovereign. Appeals to consequences galore are usually the opposition to a stateless world, but at the very least it’s possible to grasp that the interpretation of the political spectrum in this case is totalitarianism on one end, where individuals have no rights without collective approval, and anarchy on the other, where individuals have total autonomy and collectives can only ever be voluntary. Perhaps some day we can live in this world, but for now even libertarianism would be a positive result for individualists, and a perfect transitory step for the evolution of human society to voluntaryism. It seems to me that the history of mankind is the battle for individual autonomy over the collective, and I for one aim to help this cause.

http://www.rockingphilosophy.com/2012/08/the-true-political-spectrum.html

Communism, Islam, Or Christianity: These Are Literally Your Only Choices

There are two great powers in the world today: Islam and Progressivism.

You may know Progressivism from its starring role in murdering 100 million people last century. It also made a significant part of the world far poorer than it ever needed to be, given the whole Industrial Age and all. 

Like any destitute soul trying to hide a wanted felon, it’s proponents knew that Communism would not be able to show its face for a long while. It needed a disguise!
So they took Communism and threw a wig on it, gave it a spray-on tan, let it grow out a refined moustache and voilà: “Progressivism”.

In what must surely be the greatest snake oil rebranding in history, Progressivism offers the same impossible utopia at exactly the same asking price: your every human right and freedom. 

But who wants to believe that the West is going to get eaten alive by Islam when successive liars continue to promise the Marxist utopia?

When you reject biblical Christianity, those are your only two options and if you don’t much like truth, then crossing of the genuine and proven threat of Islam is just one more denial.

It is overwhelmingly obvious that we are being governed by people who absolutely do not share in the traditional values that once made this country great. The vast majority of people in this nation, however, still hold the ideals of individual liberty in very high regard, as well as the fundamental Christian principles that were the driving force behind the creation of our government and system of laws. People still believe our constitution should remain the law of the land, and, furthermore, many people are becoming increasingly frustrated with the continuous usurpations of power by the current governing body. In fact, many people are fully aware that we are being governed by communists whose number one goal is the destruction of American sovereignty in favor of a global hierarchy, in which we find ourselves subservient to the whims of global dictators. In order to overcome this, we have to understand it for what it is: spiritual warfare.

Communism is generally understood, at the very least, to be a system of economics in which government controls all aspects of a society’s production. This is purported to ensure equality and fairness among the masses. Communist regimes have historically claimed that a utopian, egalitarian paradise awaited the masses if they would simply surrender their rights and let government have the necessary power. Others believe communism to be a system of absolute atheism, where the belief in a God other than the state was absolutely forbidden, as people who worshipped a God would not offer total subservience to the governing powers. While these descriptions may give someone a basic understanding of what communism is, they are not totally accurate. Communism was actually created for the very purpose of destroying religion and being the anti-thesis to western capitalism. Communism itself is a Hegelian dialectic created to cause conflict between two world views, religion and anti religion, which would eventually see the rise of what many people recognize as the New World Order.

In order to gain a better understanding, we have to look at Karl Marx, the man who was understood to be the founder of socialism/communism. Though there is reason to believe that Marx was simply financed by others to create this system, it is generally understood that he was an atheist and his lack of religion is what motivated him to create what has become known as the most oppressive governing system known to man. Karl Marx was not an atheist; he was, at one point in his life, a devout Christian whose knowledge of scripture and Biblical principles were well-rounded. In fact, the following quote was written by Marx when he was young.

“Union with Christ could give an inner elevation, comfort in sorrow, calm trust, and a heart susceptible to human love, to everything noble and great, not for the sake of ambition and glory, but only for the sake of Christ”. 

This certainly doesn’t sound like the ramblings of someone who hated or didn’t believe in God. The truth is, at some point in the life of Karl Marx, he became very angry and turned on God. Karl Marx became a Satanist. Why this happened remains unknown, but the later writings of Marx confirmed that he had indeed turned his back on God and became one with God’s adversary. The following quote illustrates this.

“…Yet I have power within my youthful arms

To clench and crush you (i.e., personified humanity)

with tempestuous force,

While for us both the abyss yawns in darkness.

You will sink down and I shall follow laughing,

Whispering in your ears ‘Descend,

come with me, friend.’”

For some reason, which again remains unknown, Karl Marx became a man filled with hatred towards God, and this is what motivated him to create communism. Though, as stated above, there is reason to believe that others from a group commonly known as the Illuminati actually paid Marx to create it. Take this quote for example from cuttingedge.org.

“We know that, in 1848, a highly select body of secret initiates who called themselves the League of Twelve Just Men of the Illuminati, financed Karl Marx to write the Communist Manifesto.”

This puts our understanding of communism into a different perspective, doesn’t it?

The essential understanding that should be taken from this is that communism wasn’t created as an economic system to create total equality; it was created as a system of governance to be run by Satan in an effort to destroy humanity and man’s divine connection to God. That is why it was created as an “Anti-Thesis” to western capitalism. The ideas behind capitalism, liberty, the free market, and every other value that made America great all revolve around one spiritual absolute, and that is that man was created with free will. What do socialism and communism always do? They create populations of non-thinking people who become totally helpless and dependent on government. Would this happen if they retained their belief in God and operated from the notion they were born with free will? This is why communism seeks to destroy religion, or, as Marx described it in The Communist Manifesto, “Destroy God in the minds of men.” The purpose wasn’t to create a system full of atheists but to create the conditions that would enable the creation of Satan’s new order. Creating atheism was but a means to an end in the quest to defeat God.

To further illustrate this, let’s examine our current presidents continuous assault upon the economy that does little but destroy opportunity and create dependence. The economy has become so bad that we have more people living on welfare than working. This does nothing but enslave and destroy an individual’s initiative. Soon, people forget how to care for themselves and they will forego their principles and vote for whomever guarantees to maintain their lifestyle of dependence. By removing opportunities to live self-sufficient lives, the Marxists create a system of slavery and convince everyone that it was done in the name of fairness. It’s the same story every time. The question is: can Marxism prevail in the Land of the free? Or, do we still have the moral, intestinal fortitude to stop it?

http://freedomoutpost.com/communism-is-spiritual-warfare-created-to-destroy-god/

2015: Worst Year For Christian Persecution On Record

Ji recently read some atheist’s comment (on a Christian website nonetheless – like bugs to the flame I tell you) mocking Christians for complaining about persecution.

Sucks to be wrong.

But it sucks even worse to be aggressively and sarcastically dismissive of Christian persecution just because you reject Christianity, especially when it’s clearly a serious issue where large swathes of innocent people are being brutally murdered across the world.

Admittedly, a lot of this particular atheist’s ire was directed at the persecution of Western Christians.

Well that both explains and justifies it then, right?

Certainly, because murdering Christians never begins with social exclusion and political pressure – in the same way that the Holocaust never began that way.

Anyways, if you care about human life (no matter their beliefs) then you might be interested in knowing about Christian persecution:

Open Doors, an organization that advocates for persecuted Christians, recently released its latest World Watch List—a report that highlights and ranks the 50 worst nations to be Christian. It found that 2015 was the “worst year in modern history for Christian persecution.”

Who claims the lion’s share of this unprecedented persecution? Muslims—of all races, nationalities, languages, and socio-political circumstances: Muslims from among America’s closest allies (Saudi Arabia #14 worst persecutor) and its opponents (Iran #9); Muslims from economically rich nations (Qatar #21) and from poor nations (Somalia #7 and Yemen #11); Muslims from “Islamic republic” nations (Afghanistan #4) and from “moderate” nations (Malaysia #30 and Indonesia #43); Muslims from nations rescued by America (Kuwait #41) and Muslims from nations claiming “grievances” against the U.S. (fill in the blank __).

The report finds that “Islamic extremism” is the main source of persecution in 41 of the top 50 countries—that is, 82 percent of the world’s persecution of Christians is being committed by Muslims. As for the top ten worst countries persecuting Christians, nine of them are Muslim-majority—that is, 90 percent of nations where Christians experience “extreme persecution” are Muslim.

Still, considering that the 2016 World Watch List ranks North Korea—non-Islamic, communist—as the number one worst persecutor of Christians, why belabor the religious identity of Muslims? Surely this suggests that Christian persecution is not intrinsic to the Islamic world but is rather a product of repressive regimes and other socio-economic factors—as the North Korean example suggests and as many politicians and other talking heads maintain?

Here we come to some critically important but rarely acknowledged distinctions. While Christians are indeed suffering extreme persecution in North Korea, these fall into the realm of the temporal and aberrant. Something as simple as overthrowing Kim Jong-un’s regime could lead to a quick halt to the persecution—just as the fall of Communist Soviet Union saw the end of religious persecution. The vibrancy of Christianity in South Korea is suggestive of what may be in store—and thus creates such fear for—its northern counterpart.

In the Islamic world, however, a similar scenario would not alleviate the sufferings of Christians by an iota. Quite the opposite; where dictators fall (often thanks to U.S. intervention)—Saddam in Iraq, Qaddafi in Libya, and ongoing attempts against Assad in Syria—Christian persecution dramatically rises. Today Iraq is the second worst nation in the world in which to be Christian, Syria fifth, and Libya tenth. A decade ago under the “evil” dictators, Iraq was ranked 32, Syria 47, and Libya 22.

The difference between Muslim and non-Muslim persecution (e.g., communist) of Christians is that the latter is often rooted in a particular regime. Conversely, Muslim persecution of Christians is perennial, existential, and far transcends this or that regime or ruler. It is part and parcel of the history, doctrines, and socio-political makeup of Islam—hence its tenacity; hence its ubiquity.

Moreover, atheistic communism is a relatively new phenomenon—about a century old—and, over the years, its rule (if not variants of its ideology) has greatly waned, so that only a handful of nations today are communist.

On the other hand, Muslim persecution of Christians is as old as Islam. It is a well-documented, even if suppressed, history. 

To further understand the differences between temporal and existential persecution, consider Russia. Under communism, its own Christians were persecuted; yet today, after the fall of the USSR, Russia is again reclaiming its Orthodox Christian heritage.

North Korea—where Kim Jong-un is worshipped as a god and the people are shielded from reality—seems to be experiencing what Russia did under the Soviet Union. But if the once mighty USSR could not persevere, surely it’s a matter of time before tiny North Korea’s walls also come crumbling down, with the resulting religious freedom that former communist nations have experienced. (Tellingly, the only countries that were part of the USSR that still persecute Christians are Muslim, such as Uzbekistan, #15, and Turkmenistan, #19.)

Time, however, is not on the side of Christians living amid Muslims; quite the opposite.

In short, Muslim persecution of Christians exists in 41 nations today as part of a continuum—or “tradition”—that started nearly 14 centuries ago. As I document in Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians, the very same patterns of Christian persecution prevalent throughout the Muslim world today are often identical to those from centuries past.

A final consideration: North Korea, the one non-Muslim nation making the top ten worst persecutors list, is governed by what is widely seen as an unbalanced megalomaniac; conversely, the other nine nations are not dominated by any “cults-of-personalities” and are variously governed: including through parliamentarian democracies (Iraq), parliamentarian republics (Pakistan and Somalia), one-party or presidential republics (Eritrea, Sudan and Syria), Islamic republics (Afghanistan and Iran), and transitional/disputed governments (Libya). Looking at the other Muslim nations that make the top 50 persecutors’ list and even more forms of governments proliferate, for example monarchies (Saudi Arabia #14).

The common denominator is that they are all Islamic nations.

Thus, long after North Korea’s psychotic Kim Jong-un has gone the way of the dodo, tens of millions of Christians and other “infidels” will continue to suffer extreme persecution, till what began in the seventh century reaches fruition and the entire Islamic world becomes “infidel” free.

Confronting this discomforting and better-left-unsaid fact is the first real step to alleviating the sufferings of the overwhelming majority of Christians around the world.

Unfortunately, however, while some are willing to point out that Christians are being persecuted around the Muslim world—why that is the case, why 82% of the world’s persecution is committed by Muslims from a variety of backgrounds and circumstances—is the great elephant in the room that few wish to address. For doing so would cause some long held and cherished premises of the modern West—chiefly the twin doctrines of religious relativism and multiculturalism—to come crashing down.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/262036/muslims-responsible-worst-year-modern-history-raymond-ibrahim

Hollywood, Testament To The Success Of Capitalism, Now Actively Promoting Communism

“Progressive” is the current name Communists go by. 

Sure, they’ve abandoned the revolutionary means of establishing Communism in favour of the culture eroding long march through the institutions but the end result is still the same: poverty and death for the masses, wealth and power for those in control.

Now Hollywood, the perfect example of an industry built on the freedoms of capitalism but long overrun by progressive types, is out to portray a new victim group: Communists.

Yep, why only remember legitimate victim groups like the millions of Jews murdered in the holocaust when we can also remember faux-victims whose ideology in practise murdered 100 million people during peace time!

Here’s the fun:

My wife and I sat down the Saturday before the Academy Awards to watch the 2015 film Trumbo. Dalton Trumbo is played by Bryan Cranston who did a marvelous job, certainly worthy of the Academy Award nomination he received for Best Actor.

It’s loosely based on the Hollywood screenwriter, author, and self-admitted Communist Dalton Trumbo (1905-1976) who was cited for Contempt of Congress for which he spent nearly a year in prison and blacklisted by film studios. I’ve been familiar with Trumbo’s work since the early 1970s through his 1939 anti-war novel Johnny Got His Gun, based on a case of World War I survivor who suffered shocking debilitating injuries.

“Shortly after the 1941 German invasion of the Soviet Union, Trumbo and his publishers decided to suspend reprinting the book until the end of the war.” With the escalation of the Vietnam War, the book became popular again, so much so that Trumbo directed the 1971 film version of the novel that starred Timothy Bottoms.

Metallica’s song “One” is based on the film.

One scene in Trumbo caught my attention. Trumbo’s oldest daughter asks him if he’s a communist. Instead of answering yes or no, he asks her, “Would you share your sandwich with someone who did not have one?” to which she replies, “Of course.” Ipso facto, he replies, “So that makes you a communist too.” If Communism is just sharing, then who could be opposed to Communism?1

Are people sharing their sandwiches in North Korea and Venezuela? No, because there are no sandwiches to share. Communism isn’t about sharing. It’s about brute force.

Charity is sharing . . . voluntarily. That’s not Communism. The Good Samaritan extended mercy by way of self-sacrificing charity by sharing what belonged to him with a man beaten by robbers:

“‘But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn and took care of him. On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I return I will repay you’” (Luke 10:30-37).

The oil, wine, the Samaritan’s mode of transportation, and the two denarii were his.

Jesus and His disciples shared a common purse as they traveled. This, too, was voluntary. No one was forced to participate.

Appeal cannot be made to Acts 2:44-45 and 4:32-37. These early Christians voluntarily sold their property and used the proceeds to help those in need. Neither the Roman Empire nor the Church had any role in the sale of the property. John R. Richardson writes:

“No one was forced into giving up his goods and possessions. It was not socialism legislated either by church or state. It does not resemble modern communism in any respect. . . . Ananais was free to keep or sell his property. When he sold it, he had the right to determine whether he would give all of it, or part of it, or none of it, into the treasury of the church for the alleviation of the needs of poor Christians. J. W. Lipscomb is certainly correct when he says, ‘The program was a voluntary expression of Christian concern for the needs of fellow Christians, and was not a program for compulsory collectivism such as we hear advocated all too often today.’”2

Paul takes up a collection for the Jerusalem church “from the saints” (1 Cor. 16:1-4; 2 Cor. 8:1-9:15; Rom 15:14-32). They gave “according to their ability, and beyond their ability, of their own accord” (2 Cor. 8:3).

The Pilgrims were initially organized as a Collectivist society as mandated by contract by their sponsoring investors. No matter how much a person worked, everybody would get the same amount. It didn’t take long for the less industrious to realize that their diminished labor would net them the same result of the mot industrious.

William Bradford (1590-1657), the acting governor of Plymouth Colony, wrote the following in his first-hand history of events:

“The experience that we had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years . . . that by taking away property, and bringing community into a common wealth, would make them happy and flourishing – as if they were wiser than God.

“For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For young men that were most able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children without [being paid] that was thought injustice.

“This [free enterprise] had very good success, for it made all hands industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been.”

Not only is Socialism immoral by being in violation of the Eighth Commandment; it doesn’t work.

Democrats who claim that rich people are not paying their “fair share” in taxes are the less violent version of Communism. The government only uses force if you refuse to pay. No guns are needed. The long arm of the law will just empty your bank account, garnish your wages, and sell off your property for your failure to “share.”

Trumbo was a man of multiple contradictions. He claimed to be a Communist but was a very rich capitalist, described by his communist friends as a “swimming pool Soviet” because the 320-acre ranch where he and his family lived had its own private lake. No community swimming hole for the Trumbos.

The biggest lie of Trumbo, Danusha V. Goska writes, “is the film’s treatment of communism. Soviet communism murdered tens of millions of innocent human beings. The USSR did have spies active in the US. They did do damage. Dalton Trumbo did obey party dictates to insert communist material into scripts.”

It’s not as if Trumbo was ignorant of Communism’s atrocities. He admitted in a letter that he had read former Communist authors who haddenounced their former affiliation and exposed “Stalin’s repression and the existence of a secret Gulag.”3 One of them was Arthur Koestler. Koestler had joined the Communist Party of Germany in 1931, but by 1938 he had left the party having become disillusioned with Stalinism. In 1940 he published his anti-totalitarian novel Darkness at Noon.

“Darkness at Noon is an allegory set in the USSR (not named) during the 1938 purges, as Stalin consolidated his dictatorship by eliminating potential rivals within the Communist Party: the military, and the professionals. None of this is identified explicitly in the book. Most of the novel occurs within an unnamed prison and in the recollections of the main character, Rubashov.”

Trumbo knew what Koestler was describing, and he chose to ignore the warnings, not only Koestler’s but other writers as well. Koestler also edited the 1949 book The God That Failed “which collects together six essays with the testimonies of a number of famous ex-communists, who were writers and journalists. The common theme of the essays is the authors’ disillusionment with and abandonment of communism.”

The history of Communism is a record of genocide,4 as D. James Kennedy and Jerry Newcombe show in their book What If Jesus Had Never Been Born?:

“Mao killed about 72 million human beings from 1948 to 1976. When we add the 40 million Stalin is responsible for, we come to a number of 112 million. Throw in Hitler’s 15 million (not counting the devastating war he started!), and we come to about 127 million. Add other killings by other atheistic and totalitarian states — as a result of their atheistic ideology — you come up with a number of more than 130 million.”5

Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s “estimates reach as high as sixty million” deaths just during Josef Stalin’s reign of terror.6 “Historian Robert Conquest, in The Harvest of Sorrow, his definitive account of Stalin’s reign of rural terror, estimated that 14.4 million people, half of them children, perished.”7

In addition to supporting an ideology that led to the deaths of tens of millions, Trumbo hid behind the First Amendment, a right that would not have been afforded to him if he had moved his family to a Communist nation. Trumbo was like so many limousine and private-jet liberals who support Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders and their wealth confiscation policies after they’ve made their multi-million-dollar fortunes. They love socialism because it keeps the competition at bay.

There’s Leonardo DiCaprio — net worth $245 million with at least five homes and a private island — promoting the scare of global warming while he jet-sets around the world burning up tens of thousands of gallons of jet fuel.
As reported in Movie Freak, Trumbo’s daughter Niki says the depicted scene never happened. “‘No,’ she chuckles, ‘we never had a conversation like that one while riding horses. That’s made up. But it’s also what I was referring to earlier. It’s another essence moment, a scene that fits what was going on at the time and the emotions we were feeling, but not actual reality. The real moment was more like me asking, “Daddy, are you a communist?” and him replying that he was. The follow-up question was something like, “Can I be a communist when I grow up?” and I wanted him to say that of course I could be; that he’d be so proud of me if I was. Instead he told me I had to be 21 before I could make decisions like that. I had to be old enough to vote. I was so disappointed! Of course, what I wanted was his approval more than I wanted to be a communist. But, I also think he didn’t want to influence my political beliefs, so he wanted to distance himself a little bit from doing that until I was older and could actually talk about, discuss and debate those sort of topics from a place of mutual understanding.’” [↩]

Christian Economics: The Christian Message to the Market Place (Houston: St. Thomas Press, 1966), 60. [↩]

Ronald Radosh and Allis Radosh, Red Star Over Hollywood: The Film Colony’s Long Romance with the Left (New York: encouner Books, 2006), 218. [↩]

Mark Kramer, ed., The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997), 4. [↩]

D. James Kennedy and Jerry Newcombe, What If Jesus Had Never Been Born? (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1994), 236. [↩]

Lloyd Billingsley, The Generation that Knew Not Josef: A Critique of Marxism and the Religious Left (Portland, OR: Multnomah Press, 1985), 38. [↩]

Lewis Lord, “A reign of rural terror, a world away,” U.S. News & World Report (June 30/July 7, 2003), 4. [↩]

It’s not long before we’ll be seeing films about hard-done by paedophiles (but only non-Catholic ones, of course) and polygamists winning the Academy Awards, I kid you not.
http://godfatherpolitics.com/soft-selling-communism-in-the-film-trumbo/

Naturalistic Evolution And Humanism: The Bloodiest Religion

Blood sacrifice is a part of most religions in some form or another because it seeks to emulate true religion that comes from God. 

It’s actually one of the easy ways to identify a false religion and the kill count of abortion stands as the biggest and longest ongoing blood sacrifice to Satan in history.

Christians are often confronted with the claim that a humanistic worldview will help society become better. Even the first Humanist Manifesto, of which belief in evolution is a subset, declared, “The goal of humanism is a free and universal society in which people voluntarily and intelligently co-operate for the common good.” But can such a statement be true?
For starters, what do the authors mean by “good”? They have no legitimate foundation for such a concept, since one person’s “good” can be another’s “evil.” To have some objective standard, they must borrow from the teachings of God in the Bible.

Beyond that, does evolution really teach a future of prosperity? What has been the result of evolutionary thinking in the past hundred years? Perhaps this could be a test of what is to come. Let’s first look at the casualties stemming from leaders with evolutionary worldviews, beginning in the 1900s, to see the hints of what this “next level” looks like:

Who/What? Specific Event and Estimated Dead

Pre-Hitler Germany/Hitler and the Nazis 

WWI: 20,000,000 dead, 21,000,000 wounded1

WWII: 72,000,0002

Holocaust: 17,000,000? (estimates range from 7 to 26 million)3
Leon Trotsky and Vladimir Lenin Bolshevik revolution and Russian Civil War: 15,000,0004

Joseph Stalin 20,000,0005

Mao Zedong 14,000,000–20,000,0006

Pol Pot (Saloth Sar) 750,000–1,700,0007
Abortion* 

China estimates 1971–2006: 300,000,0008

Russia estimates 1954–1991: 280,000,0009

US estimates 1973–2014: 57,496,01110

France estimates 1936–2006: 5,749,73111

UK estimates 1958–2006: 6,090,73812

Germany estimates 1968–2007: 3,699,62413

Charles Darwin’s view of evolution was catapulted into societies around the world in the mid- to late 1800s. Evolutionary teachings influenced Karl Marx, Leon Trotsky, Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong, Joseph Stalin, Vladimir Lenin, and many others. Let’s take a closer look at some of these people and events and examine the evolutionary influence and repercussions.

World War I and II, Hitler, Nazis, and the Holocaust

Most historians would point to the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand on June 18, 1914, as the event that triggered World War I (WWI). But tensions were already high considering the state of Europe at the time. Darwinian sentiment was brewing in Germany. Darwin once said:

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes . . . will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian [Aborigine] and the gorilla.14

Darwin viewed the “Caucasian” (white-skinned Europeans) as the dominant “race” in an evolutionary worldview. To many evolutionists at the time, mankind had evolved from ape-like creatures that had more hair, dark skin, dark eyes, etc. Therefore, more “evolved” meant less body hair, blond hair, blue eyes, etc. Later in Hitler’s era, Nazi Germany practiced Lebensborn, which was a controversial program, the details of which have not been entirely brought to light. Many claim it was a breeding program that tried to evolve the “master race” further—more on this below.

But the German sentiment prior to WWI was very much bent on conquering for the purpose of expanding their territory and their “race.” An encyclopedia entry from 1936 states:

In discussions of the background of the war much has been said of Pan-Germanism, which was the spirit of national consciousness carried to the extreme limit. The Pan-Germans, who included not only militarists, but historians, scientists, educators and statesmen, conceived the German people, no matter where they located, as permanently retaining their nationality. The most ambitious of this group believed that it was their mission of Germans to extend their kultur (culture) over the world, and to accomplish this by conquest if necessary. In this connection the theory was advanced that the German was a superior being, destined to dominate other peoples, most of whom were thought of as decadent.15

Germany had been buying into an extreme view of Darwin’s model of evolution and saw themselves as the superior “race,” destined to dominate the world. This view set the stage for Hitler and the Nazi party and paved the road to WWII.

Hitler

World War II dwarfed World War I in the total number of people who died. Racist attitudes exploded in Germany against people groups such as Jews, Poles, and many others. Adolf Hitler was heavily influenced by Darwin’s teaching on evolution.

Hitler even tried to force the Protestant church in Germany to change fundamental tenants because of his newfound faith.16 In 1936, while Hitler was in power, an encyclopedia entry on Hitler stated:

. . . a Hitler attempt to modify the Protestant faith failed.17

His actions strongly suggest that he did not hold to the basic fundamentals taught in the 66 books of the Bible. Though some of his writings suggest he did believe in some form of God early on, his religious views moved toward humanism after his acceptance of evolution. This refutes notions that Hitler was a Protestant Christian as some have claimed. Consider this quote in his unpublished second book:

The types of creatures on the earth are countless, and on an individual level their self-preservation instinct as well as the longing for procreation is always unlimited; however, the space in which this entire life process plays itself out is limited. It is the surface area of a precisely measured sphere on which billions and billions of individual beings struggle for life and succession. In the limitation of this living space lies the compulsion for the struggle for survival, and the struggle for survival, in turn contains the precondition for evolution.18

Hitler continues:

The history of the world in the ages when humans did not yet exist was initially a representation of geological occurrences. The clash of natural forces with each other, the formation of a habitable surface on this planet, the separation of water and land, the formation of the mountains, plains, and the seas. That [was] is the history of the world during this time. Later, with the emergence of organic life, human interest focuses on the appearance and disappearance of its thousandfold forms. Man himself finally becomes visible very late, and from that point on he begins to understand the term “world history” as referring to the history of his own development—in other words, the representation of his own evolution. This development is characterized by the never-ending battle of humans against animals and also against humans themselves.19

Hitler fully believed Darwin as well as Darwin’s precursors—such as Charles Lyell’s geological ages and millions of years of history. In his statements here, there is no reference to God. Instead, he unreservedly flew the banner of naturalism and evolution. His evolutionary views certainly helped lead him and the Nazi party into WWII because they viewed the “Caucasian” as more evolved, which to them justified their adoption of the idea that lesser “races” would be eliminated in the struggle for survival. Among the first to be targeted were Jews, then Poles, and then many others.

Trotsky, Lenin

Trotsky and Lenin were both notorious leaders of the USSR—and specifically the Russian revolution. Lenin, taking power in 1917, became a ruthless leader and selected Trotsky as his heir. Lenin and Trotsky held to Marxism, which was built on Darwinism and evolution. Karl Marx regarded Darwin’s book as an “epoch making book.” With regards to Darwin’s research on natural origins, Marx claimed, “The latter method is the only materialistic and, therefore, the only scientific one.”20

Few realize or admit that Marxism, the primary idea underlying communism, is built on Darwinism. In 1883, Freidrich Engels, Marx’s longtime friend and collaborator, stated at Marx’s funeral service that “Just as Darwin discovered the law of evolution in organic nature, so Marx discovered the law of evolution in human history.”21 Both Darwin and Marx built their ideologies on naturalism and materialism.

Trotsky once said of Darwin:

Darwin stood for me like a mighty doorkeeper at the entrance to the temple of the universe. I was intoxicated with his minute, precise, conscientious and at the same time powerful, thought. I was the more astonished when I read . . . that he had preserved his belief in God. I absolutely declined to understand how a theory of the origin of species by way of natural selection and sexual selection and a belief in God could find room in one and the same head.22

Trotsky’s high regard for evolution and Darwin were the foundation of his belief system. Like many, Trotsky probably did not realize that most of the precious few instances of the name “God” did not appear in the first edition of Origin of Species. These references were added later, and many suspect that this was done to influence church members to adopt Darwinism. Regardless, Trotsky may not have read much of Darwin’s second book, Descent of Man, in which Darwin claims that man invented God:

The same high mental faculties which first led man to believe in unseen spiritual agencies, then in fetishism, polytheism, and ultimately in monotheism, would infallibly lead him, as long as his reasoning powers remained poorly developed, to various strange superstitions and customs.23

Vladimir Lenin picked up on Darwinism and Marxism and ruled very harshly as an evolutionist. His variants of Marxism have become known as Leninism (see The Development of Capitalism in Russia). Regardless, the evolutionist roots of Marx, Trotsky, and Lenin were the foundation that Communism has stood on—and continues to stand on.

Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, to name a few

Perhaps the most ruthless communist leaders were Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot. Each of these were social Darwinists, ruling three different countries—the Soviet Union, China, and Cambodia respectively. Their reigns of terror demonstrated the end result of reducing the value of human life to that of mere animals, a Darwinistic teaching.24

Abortion

The war on children has been one of the quietest and yet bloodiest in the past hundred years. In an evolutionary mindset, the unborn have been treated as though they are going through an “animal phase” and can simply be discarded.

Haeckel’s Embryo Drawing

Early evolutionist Ernst Haeckel first popularized the concept that babies in the womb are actually undergoing animal developmental stages, such as a fish stage and so on. This idea has come to be known as ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. Haeckel even faked drawings of various animals’ embryos and had them next to drawn human embryos looking virtually identical.

These drawings have been shown to be completely false.25 Haeckel himself partially confessed as much.26 However, this discredited idea has been used repeatedly for a hundred years! Textbooks today still use this concept, and museums around the world still teach it.

Through this deception, many women have been convinced that the babies they are carrying in their wombs are simply going through an animal phase and can be aborted. Author Ken Ham states:

In fact, some abortion clinics in America have taken women aside to explain to them that what is being aborted is just an embryo in the fish stage of evolution, and that the embryo must not be thought of as human. These women are being fed outright lies.27

Evolutionary views have decreased the value of human life. Throughout the world the casualties of the war on children is staggering. Though deaths of children and the unborn did exist prior to the “evolution revolution,” they have increased exponentially as a result of Darwinian teachings.

Conclusion

Is evolution the cause of wars and deaths? Absolutely not—both existed long before Darwin was born. Sin is the ultimate cause.28 But an evolutionary worldview has done nothing but add fuel to the fire.

In spite of the wars and atrocities caused by those who subscribed to an evolutionary worldview in recent times, there is still hope. We can end the seemingly endless atrocities against the unborn.

In Egypt, Israelite boys were slaughtered by being thrown into the Nile at the command of Pharaoh (Exodus 1:20). And yet, by the providence of God, Moses survived and led the Israelites to safety, and the Lord later judged the Egyptians.

In Israel under the Roman Empire, Herod the Great commanded the slaughter of all the boys under the age of two in and around Bethlehem. And yet, by the providence of God, Jesus, the Son of God, survived and later laid down His life to bring salvation to mankind as the Prince of Peace. Herod’s name, however, went down in history as an evil tyrant and murderer.

In this day and age, governments readily permit the killing of children, both boys and girls, and sometimes command it (abortion). By providence, however, you survived. While we can’t change the past, we can learn from it. If we are to stop this continuing bloodshed, we must get back to the Bible and realize the bankrupt religion of evolution has led only to death—by the millions.
Footnotes

World War I Casualties, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties, October 23, 2008, as with all of these statistics, they may have some variance depending on source.

World War II Casualties, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties, October 23, 2008.

The Holocaust, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust, October 23, 2008.

Russian Civil War, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Civil_War, October 23, 2008.

Joseph Stalin, http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/stalin.html, October 23, 2008.

Mao Tse-Tung, http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/mao.html, October 23, 2008.

Pol Pot, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pol_Pot, October 23, 2008.

Historical abortion statistics, PR China, compiled by Wm. Robert Johnston , last updated 4 June 2008, http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-prchina.html.

Historical abortion statistics, U.S.S.R., compiled by Wm. Robert Johnston , last updated 4 June 2008, http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-ussr.html

“Abortion Statistics: United States Data & Trends,” National Right to Life, http://www.nrlc.org/uploads/factsheets/FS01AbortionintheUS.pdf.

Historical abortion statistics, France, compiled by Wm. Robert Johnston, last updated 4 June 2008, http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-france.html.

Historical abortion statistics, United Kingdom, compiled by Wm. Robert Johnston, last updated 4 June 2008, http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-unitedkingdom.html

Historical abortion statistics, FR Germany, compiled by Wm. Robert Johnston, last updated 4 June 2008, http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-frgermany.html

Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man (New York: A.L. Burt, 1874, 2nd ed.), p. 178.

The American Educator Encyclopedia, The United Educators, Inc., Chicago, 1936, p. 3914 under entry “World War.”

The American Educator Encyclopedia, The United Educators, Inc., Chicago, 1936, p. 1702 under entry “Hitler.”

The American Educator Encyclopedia, The United Educators, Inc., Chicago, 1936, p. 1494 under entry “Germany.”

Hitler’s Second Book, Adolf Hitler, Edited by Gerald L. Weinberg, 2003 Enigma books, Translated by Krista Smith, p. 8.

Hitler’s Second Book, Adolf Hitler, Edited by Gerald L. Weinberg, 2003 Enigma books, Translated by Krista Smith, p. 9.

Great Books of the Western World, Volume 50, Capital, Karl Marx, William Benton (Publishers), Chicago, 1952, Footnotes on p. 166 and p. 181

Gertrude Himmelfarb, Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution, London,: Chatto & Windus, 1959, p. 348.

Eastman, Max, Trotsky: A portrait of his youth, New York, pp. 117-118, 1925.

Darwin, Charles, The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex, Chapter III (Mental Powers of Man and the Lower Animals), 1871, As printed in the Great Books of the Western World, Volume 49, Robert Hutchins, Ed., Chicago, 1952, p. 303.

Raymond Hall, Darwin’s Impact—The Bloodstained Legacy of Evolution.

Michael Richardson et al, Anatomy and Embryology, 196(2):91-106, 1997.

Haeckel said, “ . . . a small portion of my embryo-pictures (possibly 6 or 8 in a hundred) are really (in Dr Brass’s [one of his critics] sense of the word) “falsified”—all those, namely, in which the disclosed material for inspection is so incomplete or insufficient that one is compelled in a restoration of a connected development series to fill up the gaps through hypotheses, and to reconstruct the missing members through comparative syntheses. What difficulties this task encounters, and how easily the draughts- man may blunder in it, the embryologist alone can judge.” The Truth about Haeckel’s Confession, The Bible Investigator and Inquirer, M.L. Hutchinson, Melbourne, March 11, 1911, p. 22–24.

Ham, Ken, The Lie: Evolution, Chapter 8 (The Evils of Evolution), Master Books, Green Forest, AK, 1987, p. 105.

The New Answers Book 1, Gen. Ed. Ken Ham, Master Books, Green Forest, Arkansas, 2006, Chapter 26: Why Does God’s Creation Include Death and Suffering?, pp.325–338.

https://answersingenesis.org/sanctity-of-life/the-results-of-evolution/

Dinesh D’Souza Was Right: Obama Helped Revive The Islamic Caliphate And He’s Not Finished Yet

I never did catch Dinesh D’Souza’s 2016: Obama’s America but I did get the gist and I haven’t been surprised by anything Obama has “achieved” so far, be it foreign policy disaster after disaster, igniting racial conflict at home, continuing to claim to be a Christian all the while supporting the murder of children and the march of homosexual totalitarianism.

While all of these things are nightmarish in themselves, nothing stands out so vividly as the fact that the first Islamic caliphate in a century appeared on Obama’s watch, specifically because he made every foreign policy move to make it a possibility and a reality.

Sadly, our days of a revived Islamic caliphate have only just begun and even now nobody seems to realise this is about the most significant event since Israel’s rebirth in 1948.

Nobody understands or cares that the last Islamic caliphate (the one that Turkey will most likely headline – just like old times) is arguably the best bet for the anitchrist empire. Even if that theory turns out wrong, and I’m happy to wait it out on that one, the world must still contend with the religion of one quarter of a billion murders coming back into the kinds of power it had in past golden ages when it conquered whole swathes of the planet in jihadic conquest.

Now that 2016 is almost here, it’s worth reconsidering just how on the money D’Souza has actually been:

If you haven’t seen the Dinesh D’Souza movie “2016: Obama’s America,” it’s a worthwhile watch. If you have seen it, now’s a good time to dust off the DVD and watch it again.

As we near the beginning of 2016, it’s more than a little unnerving to see D’Souza’s prediction about Obama working to create a new caliphate moving closer to reality.

Produced before the 2012 election, the documentary explores Obama’s life and motivations, then projects what the world will look like in 2016 if he were to win a second term, which of course he did, a little more than a year before D’Souza was indicted by the Justice Department for violating campaign finance laws. (Considering the actual crime — giving a friend money to donate to a political campaign — suggesting that D’Souza was targeted is a little like suggesting that the sun will rise tomorrow. This Administration has certainly spent less on bigger fish.)

In the documentary, the conservative author speculated that Obama picked up anti-American attitudes from his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, who according to the film grew to hate her second husband, Lolo Soetoro, when he took a job with an American company in Indonesia. Dunham’s first husband and Obama’s father became a sort of magical figure in the young Barack’s mind, praised by his mother for his anti-colonial attitudes.

Dunham, who was apparently an atheist, raised her son in a Muslim environment to act as a Muslim, according to the film, before handing him over to her parents in Hawaii, where he would fall under the influence of communist Frank Marshall Davis.

The film’s big theme is that Obama inherited hatred of America as a colonial power from his family and his exposure to the Muslim and communist worldviews, and that he acts out those feelings in a deep-seated, neurotic need for the approval of his dead father.

In 2012, the documentary predicted that in 2016, Obama’s foreign policy will have led the world to the revival of the Islamic Caliphate, with solidly Muslim countries from North Africa to the Middle East and up into Turkey joining under a renewed global Muslim leadership that hasn’t been seen for most of a century.

At the end of June 2014, ISIS declared itself to be just that, the new Caliphate.

The world at large has not officially recognized that status, but ISIS since then has grown by leaps and bounds, making its presence felt as far away as Paris and San Bernardino, California.

The other part of the plan outlined by D’Souza was the Islamization of America by increasing Muslim immigration and by taking America down a few pegs around the world and at home.

As we approach 2016, America’s economic outlook has not improved significantly, and the White House is planning to bring in waves of Muslim “refugees” and tighten gun control laws, despite recent terror attacks. In addition, Obama stands ready to hand over U.S. authority to the United Nations under a “climate change” treaty that is guaranteed to wreck the economy for years to come if it is enacted.

The “Caliphate” that has taken shape in the wake of Obama’s foreign policy is distinctly Sunni and under the shadow of the Muslim Brotherhood, from Libya to ISIS. Syria, which is also majority Sunni, is nonetheless led by the Shia Bashar al-Assad, whom Obama has been trying to remove from power for years.

Iraq, before Obama abandoned it to the tender mercies of the Sunni ISIS, was majority Shiite with a Shiite-led government.

The other piece of the puzzle that stands out is Iran, which is majority Shiite. However, its soon-to-be-bomb-ready nuclear technology makes it a powerful player on its own, and the support of Russia ensures that no U.S.-backed rebellion will stand much chance there. Still, Iran seems to see Israel as its primary enemy, so it may be seen as a tool of convenience for the time being.

Israel is the last real roadblock to the Caliphate, being the only democracy in the region, and overwhelmingly Jewish to boot. If the documentary is correct and Obama truly sees his presidency as the window of opportunity for Muslims to take down Israel, next year is the appointed time.

The only thing really standing in the way of the completion of the Caliphate’s takeover seems to be, ironically, Russia. Vladimir Putin’s alliance with Shiite governments in Syria and Iran, and now his overtures to the desperate Shiite government of Iraq, are putting obstacles in Obama’s path.

Obama may have actually undercut himself by his many efforts to weaken America. As the United States’ power is perceived to wane, so does Obama’s influence. It’s a resource Obama has squandered since Day One of his presidency in his quest to resolve his daddy issues.

Now, Putin’s obvious Alpha male status on the global stage, combined with Obama’s perception as Beta — possibly Delta — is keeping the White House from sealing the deal on an Islamic Caliphate.

Whether that changes next year remains to be seen.

Now it’s really down to how much damage the global communist Paris accords will render as cheap and easily accessible forms of energy are catapulted out of a green, communist utopia that threatens to consume the nations.

My guess?

Catastrophic.
http://politicaloutcast.com/2015/12/obamas-caliphate-getting-closer-as-2016-nears/

As Fascism And Communism Were To The 20th Century, So Too Are Atheistic Liberalism And Islam To the 21st

This is a great article by Matt Barber:

Mankind’s enduring “culture war” is nothing new. It first began in a garden long ago and today has reached a fever pitch worldwide. The battle lines are drawn, not so much between conservative vs. liberal, as many presume, but, rather, between biblical vs. unbiblical, truth vs. deception. In its most distilled form the culture war signifies the worldly manifestation of an otherworldy spiritual battle between good and evil.

African Cardinal Robert Sarah, a man many view as a potential future pope, recently made news by boldly drilling down into this reality. During the Vatican’s ongoing Synod of Bishops, Sarah noted that the “idolatry of Western freedom,” which he described as “atheistic secularism” (aka modern liberalism), and “Islamic fundamentalism” represent twin threats to the world, not unlike Nazism and communism. Atheistic secularism and Islam, he observed, are “almost like the Beasts of the Apocalypse.”

“What Nazism-fascism and communism were to the 20th century, Western ideologies on homosexuality and abortion and Islamic fanaticism are to today,” noted Sarah. “Certain keys allow us to discern the same demonic origin of these two movements: they both advocate a universal and totalitarian law, they’re both violently intolerant, destroyers of families and the Church, and openly anti-Christian,” he concluded.

Indeed, while there are exceptions, the “progressive” left is overwhelmingly anti-Semitic, anti-Christian and pro-Muslim. Liberals and Islamists, such as those belonging to the American-Islamic terrorist group CAIR, as well as Obama’s pals in the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran, have forged a bizarre and notably incongruous sociopolitical partnership I call the “Islamo-’progressive’ axis of evil.” The only explanation for this, as far as I can tell, is best illustrated by the maxim: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

The common enemy, of course, is Christ Jesus, who is Truth.

Whereas Cardinal Sarah clearly recognizes the existence of this “demonic” Islamo-“progressive” axis, it seems, and distressingly so, that the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Catholicism’s official doctrine, does not. While, on the issues of abortion, sexual sin and natural marriage, the Catechism is deeply rooted in Scripture and, as such, taps the living waters of Truth, on the problem of Islam, it has, conversely, tapped the fiery pits of hell.

On, “The Church’s relationship with the Muslims,” the Catechism states: “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

Where to begin. Rarely does one find so many mistruths packed into a single sentence.

First is the troubling assertion that, “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator.” Wrong. Even the demons “believe there is one God” (James 2:19). The plan of salvation includes, exclusively, those who at once acknowledge the Creator and have faith in His only begotten Son, Christ Jesus. Says He: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).

Islam expressly denies both the deity of Christ and that He is the Son of God. Any religion that denies Christ, the Messiah, as the Son of God, is a false religion. Any false religion that worships a god without the Son worships a false god – an idol of its own making.
Islam is idolatry. It is a false religion.

And Allah, a false god.

While, as the Catechism suggests, Muslims “profess to hold the faith of Abraham” and “adore the one, merciful God,” the fact remains that they do neither. The “faith of Abraham” foretold the coming of Christ, the Messiah, who is, in fact, the “one, merciful God” incarnate. Not only do Muslims deny Christ, they persecute, under flame and sword, His very body – the Christian faithful.

A central tenet of Islam is to convert, enslave or kill the infidel. An infidel is anyone who is not Muslim or, depending on who’s doing the killing, belongs to a different sect of Islam. Those who fall into that minority category tagged “moderate Muslim” are also infidels or “idolaters.” “When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them,” commands Surah 9:5 of the Quran. “Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them.”

Islam is about control. The word itself means “submission.” It is a socio-political pseudo-religion based upon the incoherent scribblings of one man – the “prophet” Muhammad, a warring tyrant who, as even the Quran concedes, was a murderous misogynist and pedophile. This unholy book is loosely plagiarized from the Bible’s Old and New Testaments – scriptures that, by contrast, were seamlessly transcribed over centuries by roughly 40 men under the direct and divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Islam is Christianity’s photo-negative. While Christianity brings eternal life to those choosing to surrender to Jesus, who alone is “the Way, the Truth and the Life,” Islam brings eternal death to those who surrender to Allah, who is “the best of deceivers” (“[A]nd Allah was deceptive, for Allah is the best of deceivers.” [see Surah 3:54]).

It’s worth mentioning here that the Bible similarly calls Satan a deceiver. Revelation 12:9, for instance, explains that he “deceives the whole world.” Even though it is often claimed that Muslims, Christians and Jews “worship the same God,” nothing could be further from the truth. Allah is not God. Allah is the deceiver, and insofar as Christianity, true Christianity, spreads peace, love and truth – Islam, true Islam, spreads violence, hate and deception. Allah is definitely real. He’s just not God. Though he wanted to “ascend above the tops of the clouds” and “make [himself] like the Most High” (Isaiah 14:14), Allah, most assuredly, is not God.

And so, the “best of deceivers” cares not whether we worship the idol of self, as do the secular-”progressives,” the deceiver himself, as do the Muslims, or some other false god. The deceptive one cares only that we deny God the Father, Christ His Son and the Holy Spirit, three in one.

Those who refuse will face persecution, even unto temporal death.

But those who refuse will likewise face salvation, even unto eternal Life.

http://godfatherpolitics.com/25870/islam-and-liberalism-twin-beasts-of-the-apocalypse/

The U.N. Is Playing Their Hand At A Global Communist Utopia

When government controls too much, the people always pay a high price.

When the government in question is promising “utopia”, you just know the suffering will be proportionally magnified.

Make no mistake – this will usher in a new era of global Christian persecution no matter what social justice Pretoria they spew.

Here’s Michael Snyder’s report:

Have you heard of “the global goals”? If you haven’t heard of them by now, rest assured that you will be hearing plenty about them in the days ahead. On September 25th, the United Nations launched a set of 17 ambitious goals that it plans to achieve over the next 15 years. A new website to promote this plan has been established, and you can find it right here. The formal name of this new plan is “the 2030 Agenda“, but those behind it decided that they needed something catchier when promoting these ideas to the general population. The UN has stated that these new “global goals” represent a “new universal Agenda” for humanity. Virtually every nation on the planet has willingly signed on to this new agenda, and you are expected to participate whether you like it or not.

Some of the biggest stars in the entire world have been recruited to promote “the global goals”. Just check out the YouTube video that I have posted below. This is the kind of thing that you would expect from a hardcore religious cult…

If you live in New York City, you are probably aware of the “Global Citizen Festival” that was held in Central Park on Saturday where some of the biggest names in the music industry promoted these new “global goals”. The following is how the New York Daily News described the gathering…

It was a party with a purpose.

A star-studded jamboree and an impassioned plea to end poverty rocked the Great Lawn in Central Park as more than 60,000 fans gathered Saturday for the fourth-annual Global Citizen Festival.

The feel-good event, timed to coincide with the annual gathering of world leaders at the United Nations General Assembly, featured performances by Beyoncé, Pearl Jam, Ed Sheeran and Coldplay.

And it wasn’t just the entertainment industry that was promoting this new UN plan for a united world. Pope Francis traveled to New York to give the address that kicked off the conference where this new agenda was unveiled…

Pope Francis gave his backing to the new development agenda in an address to the U.N. General Assembly before the summit to adopt the 17-point plan opened, calling it “an important sign of hope” at a very troubled time in the Middle East and Africa.

When Danish Prime Minister Lars Rasmussen struck his gavel to approve the development road map, leaders and diplomats from the 193 U.N. member states stood and applauded loudly.

Then, the summit immediately turned to the real business of the three-day meeting — implementation of the goals, which is expected to cost $3.5 trillion to $5 trillion every year until 2030.

Wow.

Okay, so where will the trillions of dollars that are needed to implement these new “global goals” come from?

Let me give you a hint – they are not going to come from the poor nations.

When you read over these “global goals”, many of them sound quite good. After all, who wouldn’t want to “end hunger”? I know that I would like to “end hunger” if I could.

The key is to look behind the language and understand what is really being said. And what is really being said is that the elite want to take their dream of a one world system to the next level.

The following list comes from Truthstream Media, and I think that it does a very good job of translating these new “global goals” into language that we can all understand…

Goal 1: End poverty in all its forms everywhere

Translation: Centralized banks, IMF, World Bank, Fed to control all finances, digital one world currency in a cashless society

Goal 2: End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture

Translation: GMO

Goal 3: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages

Translation: Mass vaccination, Codex Alimentarius

Goal 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all

Translation: UN propaganda, brainwashing through compulsory education from cradle to grave

Goal 5: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls

Translation: Population control through forced “Family Planning”

Goal 6: Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all

Translation: Privatize all water sources, don’t forget to add fluoride

Goal 7: Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all

Translation: Smart grid with smart meters on everything, peak pricing

Goal 8: Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all

Translation: TPP, free trade zones that favor megacorporate interests

Goal 9: Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation

Translation: Toll roads, push public transit, remove free travel, environmental restrictions

Goal 10: Reduce inequality within and among countries

Translation: Even more regional government bureaucracy like a mutant octopus

Goal 11: Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable

Translation: Big brother big data surveillance state

Goal 12: Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns

Translation: Forced austerity

Goal 13: Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts*

Translation: Cap and Trade, carbon taxes/credits, footprint taxes

Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development

Translation: Environmental restrictions, control all oceans including mineral rights from ocean floors

Goal 15: Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss

Translation: More environmental restrictions, more controlling resources and mineral rights

Goal 16: Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels

Translation: UN “peacekeeping” missions (ex 1, ex 2), the International Court of (blind) Justice, force people together via fake refugee crises and then mediate with more “UN peacekeeping” when tension breaks out to gain more control over a region, remove 2nd Amendment in USA

Goal 17: Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development

Translation: Remove national sovereignty worldwide, promote globalism under the “authority” and bloated, Orwellian bureaucracy of the UN

If you doubt any of this, you can find the official document for this new UN agenda right here. The more you dig into the details, the more you realize just how insidious these “global goals” really are.

The elite want a one world government, a one world economic system and a one world religion. But they are not going to achieve these things by conquest. Rather, they want everyone to sign up for these new systems willingly.

The “global goals” are a template for a united world. To many, the “utopia” that the elite are promising sounds quite promising. But for those that know what time it is, this call for a “united world” is very, very chilling.

Someone will benefit greatly from this in the short term (ie before Jesus brings judgment and justice) but it won’t be you or me.

So these elites can play their games of world peace and unity, while we suffer the consequences, but in the end they will all pay for attempting to usurp God.
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/this-happened-in-september-the-un-launched-the-global-goals-a-blueprint-for-a-united-world

Leon Trotsky: The Product Of Darwinian Evolution And Marxism

Jesus spoke about a good tree producing good fruit and Masterchef often mentions using the best ingredients to create the best dishes.

What do you get from the bad tree and from combining bad ingredients?

Barry Woolley provides us with the answers:

Leon Trotsky (1879–1940) was the organizer, propagandist, and military leader of the communist seizure of power in Russia following the revolution of 1917. He was communist dictator Lenin’s heir apparent, until Stalin usurped this position. Intolerant, tactless and impatient, Trotsky had an unbounded faith in Marxism, which was reinforced by his uncritical acceptance of Darwinism.

His fanatical faith in these ideologies and his angry intolerance of enemies saw him use the Red Army to crush the enemies of the newly formed Soviet state in the Russian Civil War of 1918–20. He instituted the militarization of civilian labour and the confiscation of food from peasants. He crushed the Ukrainian Army of Insurgent Peasants; and its anarchist guerrilla leader, Nestor Makhno (1889–1934), who had been his ally against the White Russians, was badly wounded but managed to flee the country with his family. Trotsky brutally suppressed the Soviet sailors at Kronstadt,1 and committed other acts of violence with ease, ‘because of his absolute conviction that they served the purposes of the proletariat and its permanent revolution’.2

After the end of the Russian Civil War, Trotsky’s boundless energies were channelled into handling administrative details and carrying out such pet projects as the leadership of the Society of the Godless, which was responsible for the spread of the Soviets’ antitheistic propaganda. He was an ardent atheist and advocated an “atheistic substitute” for religion; this involved the use of the theatre for antireligious propaganda, and Communistic rituals of ‘red’ baptisms, ‘red’ weddings, ‘red’ Easters, etc.3 He persecuted Christians, desecrated church property, and hated all middle-class morality.

Trotsky advocated permanent worldwide revolution4 and called for the communist seizure of power in Germany and other countries where he thought conditions were ripe for such violent actions.

How could it have come about that Trotsky, the son of a rich Jewish land-owner,5 became so vehemently prejudiced against his father’s class and against religion? It had a lot to do with his college failure and his sexual sin.

At the age of 17, Trotsky dropped out of college to join a revolutionary commune. The only Marxist member of this group was a woman, some six years his senior, named Alexandra Lvovna Sokolovskaya. At first, he was ferociously antagonistic to both Alexandra and her Marxist views, so much so that at a New Year’s Eve party in 1896 he proposed a toast with the words, “A curse on all Marxists, and on all those who want to bring hardness and dryness into all life’s relationships!”6

However, he then began an affair with her, which caused him to reconsider her Marxism. After the commune’s activities landed its members in the Tsar’s prisons,7 Trotsky had ample time to develop his ideologies.

In prison in Odessa, Trotsky read Darwin’s Origin of Species and his Autobiography. Years later he wrote, “Darwin destroyed the last of my ideological prejudices. … In the Odessa prison I felt something like hard scientific ground under my feet. Facts began to establish themselves in a certain system. The idea of evolution and determinism—that is, the idea of a gradual development conditioned by the character of the material world—took possession of me completely.

Trotsky advocated permanent worldwide revolution and called for the communist seizure of power in Germany and other countries.

“Darwin stood for me like a mighty doorkeeper at the entrance to the temple of the universe. I was intoxicated with his minute, precise, conscientious and at the same time powerful, thought. I was the more astonished when I read … that he had preserved his belief in God.8 I absolutely declined to understand how a theory of the origin of species by way of natural selection and sexual selection and a belief in God could find room in one and the same head.”9

The details would be filled in later, but in the age of great scientists like James Clerk Maxwell and Louis Pasteur, who were Christian creationists, Trotsky took up the faith of Marx and Darwin. The conversion experience was genuine and thorough. Its legacy would be written in the torrents of blood that flowed under his hand.

In 1940, Trotsky, while living in exile in Mexico, was assassinated on the orders of Josef Stalin, another who was converted to an atheistic view of life through reading Darwin. Stalin was perhaps history’s greatest mass murderer. He and Trotsky acted in a way that was quite consistent with their presuppositions: if no one made me, no one owns me, and there is no absolute right or wrong. In such an evolution-based worldview, there is nothing intrinsically ‘wrong’ with murdering people, even millions of them.

http://creation.com/darwin-trotsky-connection

The Cancer of Marxism in Christianity

Christianity and Marxism are incompatible.

In spite of this, many Christians speak Marxism without ever having studying Karl Marx’s teachings or doing some basic history to see how many people were murdered and societies crippled by the pursuit of Marx’s outlined Communist utopia.

It’s why theological colleges are full of people who love to spout on about ‘liberation theology’ but who show no interest in eschatology – the return of Christ to assume his throne and rule over the nations as Israel’s king.

One is a human centred ideology built upon an anti-biblical worldview and the other is what the entire bible is about. Marx, an atheist and an anti-theist, cared little for what the bible said and so the fruit of those riddled with the Marxist ideological cancer is a passion for ’causes’ but not much for scripture.

Needless to say, the failure of the Western church to remain separate from the ideas of the world is a big part of why we look so much like the world, with many Christians welcoming “homosexual marriage”, decrying capitalism, and looking to big government to solve social ills.

Now we have the Pope receiving a figure of Christ crucified on a hammer and sickle and deciding it’s a nice gift:

Last week the Marxist quasi-dictator of Bolivia, Evo Morales, presented Pope Francis with a gift: a carved wooden hammer and sickle cross on which the figure of Christ is crucified. 

The Vatican announced that the pope had not been informed in advance about the gift. And some commentators said photos of the pope and Morales show that the pope was actually offended. That was a false — probably wishful — interpretation. The pope himself later announced that he was keeping the hammer and sickle crucifix and taking it home, saying, “I understand this work. For me it wasn’t an offense.”

And as reported by The Guardian, “Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi said he personally wasn’t offended by Morales’ gift.” 

The pope’s acceptance of Morales’ gift — along with his attacks on capitalism during his Latin American tour — further confirms one of the most troubling moral developments of our time: The Roman Catholic Church is currently led by a man whose social, political and economic views have been shaped by Leftism more than by any other religious or moral system.

It also reconfirms what is probably the single most important development one needs to understand in order to make sense of the contemporary world: The most dynamic religion of the past hundred years has been Leftism — not Christianity or Islam or any other traditional religion. Indeed, regarding traditional religions, Leftism has influenced them — particularly Christianity and Judaism — far more than they have influenced the Left. Mainstream Protestant Christianity, much of Catholicism (especially in Latin America, where Pope Francis lived his whole life before becoming pope), and most of non-Orthodox Judaism have become essentially liberal/Left movements with religious (and in the case of Judaism, ethnic) identities.

In terms of evil committed, what is the difference between the hammer and sickle and the swastika? Would the pope receive, let alone keep, a fascist, racist or Nazi sculpture with a crucified Christ on it? Of course not. Yet the hammer and sickle represents more human suffering than all of them combined.

The number of people enslaved and murdered under the hammer and sickle dwarfs the number of people enslaved and murdered by any other doctrine in history.

To make things worse, Francis received this gift from a man (Morales) wearing a picture of Che Guevara on his jacket. Is that, too, not worthy of condemnation by the Vatican? Guevara devoted his life to undermining human liberty and to killing innocents in the name of Communism.

What if, in a visit to an American museum, American artist Andres Serrano had presented Francis with a gift — his work of art “Piss Christ” — that features a crucifix in a jar of Serrano’s urine?

Would the pope have accepted it? Would he have brought it home?

There could not have been a gift that more accurately represents this pope’s value system than Christ crucified on a hammer and sickle. First, in a literal sense, that is exactly what Communists have done wherever they have assumed power: crucified Christ by working to violently to destroy Christianity and murder Christians. Second, in a figurative sense, the gift represents the melange of Christianity and Marxism, precisely what much of the church, again especially in Latin America, and especially this pope stand for.

My heart breaks for the millions of Catholics who feel that their beloved church is being led over a moral and religious cliff by a Leftist pope and innumerable other Leftists among cardinals, bishops and parish priests. 

Though I am not a Catholic, my heart breaks, too. The only institutions that can resist the left-wing takeover of contemporary life are religious ones. When they fail, upon which institutions can we depend?

Tragically, we cannot turn to the contemporary Catholic Church. When the pope keeps a hammer and sickle crucifix; when the pope declares free market capitalism, the one economic system that has lifted masses of people out of poverty, to be largely evil (“the dung of the devil”); when Cuba’s Cardinal Jaime Ortega declares that there are no political prisoners in Cuba; and when the pope issues an encyclical on global warming while the oldest Christian communities in the world are exterminated, it is clear that while one can still turn to individual Catholic priests and lay leaders for moral guidance, one cannot turn to the Catholic Church and its pope for moral guidance. On the contrary. One must fight back.

Holding hands with an ideology that wants to make Christianity disappear off the face of the planet is a bad idea, plain and simple.

Someone like the Pope ought to know way better.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/259463/pope-and-hammer-and-sickle-dennis-prager