- For America’s God-acknowledging creed, what political home?
- A God-acknowledging party- if we strive to build it, will you come?
- Secessionist or Federalist- which reclaims the Providential wisdom of America’s founding?
- Union under God, but not against His law
- What standard can revive the good faith of America’s founding?
- If we have the daring to acknowledge Him
- What’s in the name?
- Christ and the republican capacity for self-government
The Christian Federalist #2
24 If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25 And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. 26 And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but is coming to an end. 27 But no one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man. Then indeed he may plunder his house. (Mark 3:24-27)
To make sure that it serves its intended purpose (which is the overthrow of Constitutional self-government, of, by and for the people) the elitist faction’s script for the 2012 election included a post-script. No matter how the election turned out, the moral of the story was always going to be the same- in order to win American politicians must embrace elitist socialism. Of course, this lesson especially targets the GOP.
This is so because the GOP’s role in the elitist faction’s orchestration of the political process is to befuddle and demoralize the conservatives with results that
…move the government toward greater consolidation of socialist politics. In the process the term “conservative” gets progressively (pun intended) redefined to encompass more and more of the features of socialism. What is more important, those who articulate and insist upon approaches that actually correspond to conservative principles and institutional goals (like respecting unalienable rights, preserving the natural family, encouraging morally responsible individual entrepreneurship and competitive free enterprise) are put in the false position of being unrealistic “purists” and rigid opponents of “the possible”. (Is Romney to lead conservatives to self-extinction?)
Had Romney won the election, conservative principles would have been abandoned in order to “reach across the aisle” in a bipartisan spirit of unity. Such was the theme of Romney’s speeches in the closing days of the campaign. But Obama won. So, like a teenager on prom night, GOP Speaker of the House John Boehner can’t wait to drop his abstinence only conservative date at her outdated home. He’s ready to shed the formal wear put on for the campaign season. He’s almost frantically eager to cast off the GOP’s façade of phony conservative inhibitions (against tax and spend government policies,) and get down with the newly elected Prom King in an orgy of bipartisan socialist relations, aimed at proving that a lame duck still has one leg to paddle with.
Such is “the culmination of more than twenty years of…stupidly destructive…”conservative pragmatism.” In terms of politics it “represents the successful “transvaluation of values” (as the Nazi’s muse, Friedrich Nietzsche called it. That’s the political equivalent of a sex-change operation.)
Many GOP leaders dutifully played their role in the elitist faction’s election farce. They were the supposedly conservative chorus, luridly portraying Obama as the last act of America’s play, and “reluctantly”(?) touting Romney as the “less evil” (because somewhat longer?) alternate version of the same ending. As the elitist faction media launches into the post-script phase, these leaders are coming forward to react against the notion that conservatism had anything to do with Romney’s defeat. This requires, of course, implicitly contradicting the notion that Romney is a conservative, making all their actual or implied statements to the contrary during the campaign seem rather like, well, lies.
That’s the problem with making expediency your political standard. It’s especially a problem for self-professed conservatives in the GOP who want people to believe that they still embrace the “self-evident truths” on which the U.S. was founded. People who show no respect for factually observable truths have little or no credibility when they claim to respect truths that require sound reasoning as well as observation. After all, reason ultimately derives its force from a moral commitment to its discipline, i.e., a willingness to acknowledge, the truth, in principle, and to follow its logic, whether or not it serves our passionate interests.
By encouraging people to let their fear of Obama drive them to Romney, these supposedly conservative prophets of “lesser evil” lent themselves to corrupting the mind and character of the electorate. Such corruption is the definitive cause of the destruction of Constitutional self-government in the U.S. Uninformed by principle, passionate self-interest can no more provide a basis for human self-government than the random interaction of uninformed matter provides for the orderly relations of material things. I made this point back in February (Santorum’s Ave Maria U. Speech “off message”? ), in a discussion of the “divided against itself” passage quoted from Scripture at the opening of this post:
A rational thinker as renowned as Immanuel Kant thought it reasonable, by exploring the limits of purely human understanding, to preserve a basis for moral reasoning that secures the salutary effects (especially in the political sphere) of acknowledging this Being of beings, beyond the limits of our self-conscious knowledge, which we must nonetheless assume in order to exist, no matter what conviction we hold with respect to its reality.
In a way the inevitability of this acknowledgement is evident even in the “scientific” theory that most adamantly insists on pretending that it rejects the premise of an intrinsic, intelligent, and superintendent being for the world as we know it. In his book The Signature in the Cell (Chapter 1) former geophysicist and college professor Dr. Stephen C. Meyer notes that, despite their dogmatic adherence to the theory of evolution, “modern biologists can scarcely describe living organisms without resorting to language that seems to imply the very thing they implicitly deny: intentional and purposive design.”
Advances in our scientific knowledge of living organisms more and more confirm that our bodies are sophisticated information processing units. This insight in turn confirms the wisdom of America’s Founders. They resisted the notion that the random activity of mindless matter could somehow be construed to explain away the rational need for a superintendent being, whose will and intention inform the nature, and perpetuate the existence, of our humanity.
Could it be that the form of government based on the Founders’ wisdom is now failing (instead of rising from strength to strength, as in the past) because we have turned our back on the insight it depends on? Could it be that the elitist controlled Democrat and Republican parties now work together to destroy the nation because they have rejected this insight? Could it be that there is no way to avoid our decline and fall until and unless Americans who still acknowledge the existence and authority of God reject the Godless politics of mindless materialism both these parties now practice? In truth, there is but one division of the house that does not set America against itself- the one that separates the self-worshiping elitist minority that denies God from the God-acknowledging majority that refuses to deny Him. Where is the Party that represents this majority? If we strive to build it will you come? If we do not build it, the worst is yet to come.