Tag: melian dialogue

Political Factions and the Impotence of Christianity

Roger Mitchell1 Comment

there is an old joke, best told by monty python, about revolutionary movements. everyone agrees on the enemy. everyone agrees on the objective. and yet the room is full of factions who despise one another far more than they fear the empire they claim to oppose. the people’s front, the popular front, the other front that split off last year after a disagreement about principles. the comedy works because it is painfully familiar. shared goals are easy. shared coordination is not. — Hugh Hendry1 https://www.zerohedge.com/crypto/modern-money-only-works-cheating-if-youre-long-bitcoin-or-not-long-bitcoin-read

Sounds like modern-day politics in America, doesn’t it? Except that there is no revolutionary movement, no one agrees on the common enemy, they can’t agree on the objective nor how to reach it. They just know they can’t get along. America is full of factions who despise each other and fight with each other, almost always to the point that they forget about opposing the empire they claim they fear. The Republicans, the Democrats, the socialists, the libertarians, the progressives, the communists, the right-wingers, the blue-haired lesbian land whales with nose rings, the anarchists, the Covidians, the white, male, cis-gender Christian, et al. And, while shared goals are easy when the goal is to make money and everyone is in tune with that, the usual pattern of action is that a few make a lot of money, most make enough to get by, and some starve in the face of plenty. The difference is in which group has the power to make and enforce the rules. If the shared goals are to get what you want at somebody else’s expense, well…, that’s called politics, the law of the jungle, theft by majority rule, and the groups generally split along the same lines.

“The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” — Thucydides2

Everyone, it seems, has their own favorite pet whipping boy which they can point to and condemn him for causing all the trouble we have today. And, yet, in the midst of all the uproar, the furor, and the confusion, very few of them pause to consider that they might be adding to the problem instead of contributing to the solution. This, however, is nothing new and it hearkens all the way back to The Beginning, the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve.

“Then the man said, ‘The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate.’ And the Lord God said to the woman, ‘What is this you have done?’ The woman said, ‘The serpent deceived me, and I ate.'” — Genesis 3: 12-13

Whenever there is a problem between people, the initial temptation is to point the finger, exactly as Adam and Eve did. “This woman…” “That snake…” It is so easy to do that we often fall into it automatically, without ever thinking about it or acting contrary to our fallen human nature. C’mon, now, be honest. Isn’t this the tendency within the human soul? If I can get someone else to shoulder the blame and pay the price, then perhaps, just maybe, I won’t be liable for it at all. Or, if I am found guilty, my punishment might be reduced from the level it would have been if I was found responsible in the first place.

When it comes to doing and saying what is right, it is easier to align with those you most identify with than to stand alone. Yet, we are called to speak the truth even if it means that we must stand alone against the churning, moiling mob of dissent and chaos. We are called to speak the truth even it it means standing alone against the beliefs, preferences, and wishes of our own comrades and close associates.

This is one of the most difficult things in life to do as it runs the risk of alienation and separation from the society we are part of. The Covid farce, still in our very recent rear-view mirrors, brought this out in a real way and the stories are manifold of close, loving relationships being broken irreparably because someone dared to speak the truth and those who heard would not accept it, choosing instead to believe the lie. Believing a lie requires no effort or suffering, but breaking free from that is costly and painful.

The most modern lie of all (which is also the most ancient) is that power, for the sake of power, is the highest goal we can work for. Incidentally, this is also relevant to the Garden of Eden, in which the Serpent promised Eve that she could be like God if she wanted to be, determining what was good and what was evil.

“For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” — Genesis 3:5

If we, and the group we represent, can gain power over those others who are in opposition to us, then we can make things right. We can advance proper legislation and administer proper justice. We can usher in an era of peace, prosperity, and the pursuit of happiness. Utopia, in other words. Heaven on Earth can (and will) be accomplished if, but only if, our mode of thinking becomes the dominant force and all others are subjugated to it. Is this not an accurate description of modern (and ancient) political life? Hasn’t this line of thought been the guiding principle throughout human history, from the very first tribal battles all the way to the present day, resulting in death and destruction everywhere and always? Isn’t this desire, often spoken verbally, more often harbored silently, the reason why we cannot get along with those around us, our fellow man? We want power, they want power, our wants are at odds with their wants, therefore, we must go to war and kill or be killed.

And, in the process of wreaking havoc on our enemies, we bring it on ourselves!

“Give, and it will be given to you: good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over will be put into your bosom. For with the same measure that you use, it will be measured back to you.” — Luke 6:38

This promise from the lips of Jesus is generally taken (at least in so-called Christian circles, IMO) to mean that the more money you contribute to “charity” or drop into the “offering plate” on Sunday morning, the greater your reward. ROI. Return on investment and, if we were entirely honest with ourselves, we would have to admit that this perception might very well be lurking in the back of our minds. However, context, context, context. The verse quoted is taken from a passage (Luke 6:20-42) which is not so much about money as it is with doing what is necessary to live and get along peacefully with our enemies.

  1. v. 27: “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you.”
  2. v. 29: “To him who strikes you on one cheek, turn the other also.”
  3. v. 31: “And just as you want men to do to you, you also do to them likewise.”3
  4. v. 36: “Be merciful, just as your Father also is merciful.”
  5. v. 37: Judge not…”

Judge not. Ahhhh! Now we’re getting somewhere. Isn’t it true that, in our interactions with others, we make judgments about them and attempt to correct the error of their ways, the way we perceive the error of their ways to be? And, isn’t it also true that the primary way we attempt to correct the error of their ways is to gain power over them politically, socially, and/or financially, usually through the democratic process known as voting to elect “our” representative to a seat in the halls of the government who will perform according to our wishes? Don’t like what is happening around you? Can’t exercise sufficient influence to change it on your own? Then, appoint a proxy to do it for you, who will also do it to you when it is convenient for him.

Ultimately, this boils down to one thing: pride, which begets arrogance. “I am. I am right. I am something to behold. My word is to be taken as truth. Listen to me, you knot-headed, hard-headed people, none of whom are as intelligent as I am! In other words, I am a substitute for God Himself.”

“How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How you are cut down to the ground, you who weakened the nations! For you have said in your heart: ‘I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will also sit on the mount of the congregation, on the farthest sides of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High.'” — Isaiah 14:12-14

Allow me to be explicit here. If you refuse to live according to the pattern set in Luke 6, as shown above, then you are acting out the lie brought out in Isaiah. These two passages are diametrically opposed and, to the extent that you practice the one, you are not practicing the other. You can live after the manner of Jesus, humble, loving, seeking God’s will AND the greatest benefit to others, or you can live after the manner of the king of Babylon, proud, arrogant, condemning, judgmental, vindictive, hateful. There is a third way, of course, which is to ride the rail, straddle the fence between these two options, which works until someone like the prophet Elijah comes along. “How long halt ye between two opinions?”, which was immediately followed by calling down fire from heaven. Not good for the priests of Baal nor the fence sitters who refused to make up their minds.

Yes, as Hendry said in the beginning quote, the comedy works and it really would be comedic if it wasn’t so serious. The question is, however, would it continue to work if Christians everywhere, those who call themselves disciples of Jesus the Christ, quit playing The Game as it is currently framed and simply stopped fighting tooth and nail with those who have a different viewpoint? How long would this continual struggle for supremacy go on if you and I just abandoned the battle with each other and started living life as it was meant to be–to love God with all our hearts, souls, and minds, and to love our neighbors at least as much as we love ourselves?

I think I’m right. You got an issue with that???

  1. You can read the entire article by clicking the link above, however, it is quite long-winded and I think repetitive when it doesn’t need to be. Quite interesting, though, as Hendry summarizes an unassailable distinction between gold and Bitcoin. ↩︎
  2. Melian Dialogue ↩︎
  3. “Do unto them, except do it first. Before they act, show them how it’s done.” The world understands this, why can’t Christians? ↩︎

Ok, Mr. Trump. What’s Next? Who’s Next?

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

It’s been a few days since the United States attacked Venezuela in the middle of the night and captured kidnapped President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, packing them out, and sending them in handcuffs to New York City where they will be charged with, well, something which has a high probability of winning in a court packed with team players. You know, narco-terrorism, gang activity, gun-running, theft of American property, and perhaps even unauthorized intent to interfere in the 2028 presidential election, among others yet to be thought of. But, you know, “justice” has to be and will be served. Criminals simply cannot be allowed to run around loose like that, you know.

“The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” — Melian Dialogue

I’ve read a lot of widely varying viewpoints on this affair and I still don’t know what is the truth. Probably never will for sure, but that isn’t going to stop me from forming my own opinion. Neither should it prevent you because we can only take what we know, including the obviously blatant lies and propaganda, and make the best decision we can with that information. Since we never have the complete truth, we have to make do with what we have. So, here’s mine.

I’m increasingly convinced that the whole affair was a staged act of theater, designed to make it appear that America was back, riding high in the saddle after getting bucked off in Iraq and Afghanistan.1 Yeah, we can do whatever we want because we are the only country in the world who could do such a thing! Braggadocio! Bravado! Pump that fist to pump up the standing of those who are calling the shots and not doing really well at solving anything. Not to mention that this episode is a great distraction from the ongoing fracas known as Total Release of the Complete and Minimally Redacted Set of the Epstein Files. Yeah, how much have you heard about that in the last few days and when will it reassert itself as front-page news? If America gets bogged down in a Viet Nam-style war in Venezuela, will we ever hear anything more about it?

Popular blogger, Simplicius, has fronted the possibility that Trump and Putin actually worked out a deal between them in which the US would agree to withdraw from Ukraine and Putin would look the other way on Venezuela. Whether this is accurate doesn’t matter as much as it adds to the suspicions that the whole thing is about large, muscular states overriding and destroying the sovereignty of smaller weaker ones without any qualms, without any concern as to who gets hurt in the process.

“As the US was so concerned about the Monroe Doctrine and its own backyard, perhaps the US might also be concerned about developments in Russia’s backyard, as in Ukraine, making it very obvious that they were trying to set ip [sic] some kind of let’s just say: You stay out of Ukraine or you move out of Ukraine, and, you know, we’ll rethink where we are with Venezuela.” – Fiona Hill to Congress, October 14, 2019

This seems to me to be a good case of strong arm bullying on the cheap without having to sink huge amounts of men, material, and money into the operation. If that is the case AND if it pans out well for Trump, then he has succeeded spectacularly. However, we cannot discount the idea that it will not play the way it was designed and that the aftermath might just be too much to bear. It is almost certain that the real reason for this was to regain control of the massive amounts of crude oil buried there, not to punish small time drug dealers or gang leaders. The question remains as to how the “campesinos” in Venezuela react to the taking of Maduro and the subsequent seizure of property which they might consider their own. If Trump attempts to impose a puppet government for the purpose of streamlining the transfer of that oil to large multinational companies against the popular will of the people, he may find that he has jumped from the frying pan into the fire.

There are, of course, those niggling, nagging, little things called consequences, many of them as yet unseen.

  • 1. The “international rules-based order” so loudly trumpeted by the West as a defense of its policies and actions, and a denunciation of other nations which refused to “follow the rules”, is dead. Kaput. Rigor mortis setting in. There is no more system, only raw, naked power which is used by those who have the means to exercise it against those who cannot defend themselves.2 This applies as well to the much-vaunted “rule of law” proclaimed proudly as the basis of the supposed republic which Ben Franklin warned would have to be kept or it would disappear. Gone. Gone forever. It will never return in its previous form. From here on out, it is the law of the jungle–“Kill or be killed.”
  • The capture kidnapping and arrest of Nicolas Maduro on specious charges follows the same pattern as set by that in the case of Manuel Noriega in 1989, and will be argued according to the legal doctrine developed at that time. Since the US government never admits wrong-doing and will continue the practice whenever it wants, a precedent has been set which will probably be followed by other nations whenever they can, up to and including the assassination of high government officials, possibly likely even presidents.
  • The US and China have only recently “resolved” their differences over the production and distribution of rare earth elements (REE) which are required in the manufacture of many modern items which we can’t live without–smart phones, hi-tech missiles, data centers, satellites, etc. Will China respond to the loss of oil purchased from Venezuela by clamping down even harder on the REE issue?
  • Will China issue its own National Security Strategy declaring that the entire east coast of Asia is now to be considered as their sphere of influence and woe to the foreign power which might dare to meddle in the sovereign affairs of the nations within it? What if Xi Jin Ping decided one day to change the name of the Taiwan Strait to the China Strait and forbade adversarial powers to enter therein, all while making threatening noises about what would happen if they did?
  • Will foreign backed “terrorist”3 cells be activated within the US? Is that tactic to be reserved until Iran is attacked again? What is to be the defense against those?
  • And, of course, the rock-hard reality that we simply cannot afford another long, drawn-out war even if it is in our own backyard.

And on, and on, and on…

This whole thing may blow over with very little damage to show for it, but I have to admit the forebodings I experienced during the Noriega crisis are amplified today. For one thing, at that time, the USSR was on the cusp of collapsing, the vision of America as the only superpower was becoming reality, and the Panama Canal was still widely considered American property. Today? Well, the US is broke, deeply indebted, universally hated, arrogant beyond belief, and led by people who are trying to reclaim her former “glory”4 by repeating the mistakes of the past. There is also the fact that in 1989, the US still had some semblance of respectability around the world, while today it is in ragged tatters.

At any rate, regardless what happens in the next few months or years, the probability that life, liberty, and happiness will be jeopardized for the average person in America and around the world has just been increased. Our situation is not getting better and this sort of Rambo-type machismo will not make it any better.

Success breeds confidence which generates hubris which causes overreach which creates mistakes which have consequences which result in disaster which end in downfall.

  1. This brings back memory of the comment George H.W. Bush made after the First Iraq War which he engineered–“It’s a proud day for America. And, by God, we’ve kicked the Vietnam syndrome once and for all.” ↩︎
  2. Boiled down to its most basic meaning, this is no different than the argument used by those who champion and practice abortion on demand. It is an aggression committed against the least powerful, most defenseless persons among us by those who refuse to act responsibly. ↩︎
  3. One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. It all depends on your perspective. However, all terrorists operate according to one principle: the use of violence and force to attain a political end, which means every single government is a terrorist group. ↩︎
  4. I have encapsulated “glory” in quotation marks as a matter of ridicule and contempt. Glory belongs to God alone and He shares with no one. (Isaiah 42:8) Remember this the next time you hear the American flag referred to as “Old Glory”. ↩︎

The Source of Our Beliefs

Roger Mitchell1 Comment

 “What he wished to believe, that is what each man believes” — Demosthenes

On multiple occasions in the past, and always in response to some person stating that he (or she, usually a he) has no religion, no god, and is, therefore, fully and sovereignly in control of his life, I have said that everyone has a god, a religion, whether they acknowledge it or not. What is the one thing, the value, the idea which you hold in highest regard, which is most important to you, and which reigns supreme over everything else in your life? Regardless of its nature or being, that is your god and the pursuit of it is your religion. You place your faith and your belief in it and you worship it. No one is exempt. No one can rise above this fact nor escape its certainty.

I have been vindicated. In his book, We Who Wrestle with God, Jordan Peterson, yes, that Jordan Peterson, writes this, barely a few pages into the foreword.

“We elevate what we most highly regard to the utmost place of supremacy or sovereignty. We aim at the upward target we deem central, however momentarily. We bring our consciousness itself to bear on what we define as worthy of the expenditure of our attention and the efforts of our action. We begin our continual journey forward by positing a good–a good that is at least better than our point of departure. This is an act of faith as well as one of sacrifice: faith, because the good could be elsewhere; sacrifice, because in the pursuit of any particular good we determine to forgo all others.”1

Nature abhors a vacuum, it is said, and those who state that there is no god and that religion is for fools literally create their own spiritual vacuum which must be filled with something. That something is usually themselves. “God does not exist, therefore, in the absence of God, I become God.” This is commonly known as atheistic humanism and its most basic tenet is that Man can determine truth for himself without any “help” from outside. The major problem with this line of thinking is that it is impossible to prove that God does or does not exist. Instead, the concept must be taken on faith, which is an aspect of a religious belief.

Some “believers” in the non-existence of God become nihilists, believers in nothing, who work toward the destruction of anything good and positive so that something else can be built in its place, subsequently to be destroyed. (See here for a good description of nihilism.)

“Let us put our trust in the eternal spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unsearchable and eternally creative source of all life–the passion for destruction is also a creative passion!” — Mikhael Bakunin

This is perpetual, unending destruction for the sake of destruction, until Utopia is reached. Somehow, Utopia will be attained. The devil is in the details.

“Deeper down, at the core of our dilemma, is a self-perpetuating crisis of thought. In a sense the difficulty is a very simple one, adequately captured in the story of Adam and Eve. Mankind, tired of dependency on its creator, seeks to strike out alone.” — John Waters

Yes, mankind seeks to strike out alone, to chart his own course, to become his own arbiter of truth. This is exactly what happened in the Garden of Eden, metaphorically or literally, and mankind is still suffering from the action taken. Mankind also suffers from the actions taken today because we have never recovered from The Lie that we could be like God, equal with Him in the determination of what constitutes and defines good and evil. We see it everywhere throughout society. It is in the forefront of the news constantly, as evidenced currently by Israel’s ongoing slaughter of her weaker neighbors, countenanced by the assertion that this is, somehow, God’s desire and, therefore, to be supported without reservation.

“The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” — from the Melian Dialogue

Yet, in spite of this, in the midst of all the chaos, din, and confusion, there is that still small voice which whispers quietly to us, which we cannot drown out or silence, no matter how hard we try: “Love your neighbor as you love yourself.”

What is God? Who is God? Who shall declare himself as God? There is only one answer and it is seen in the immediate quote above. Even this, though, is subject to interpretation because if Man is God, then however Man loves his neighbor is right and proper, as in, “Do to your neighbor, but do it to him first”, which is pure aggression, or “Love your neighbor, but more especially his wife”, because in all probability, your neighbor is “loving” your wife, even as we speak.

This whole conversation thus reverts back to the beginning: what is truth, and who will define it. Shall I submit to a higher authority and align my life with its (His) decrees or shall I make the vain attempt to go my own way and declare myself God, regardless of the cost?

Does it really matter who or what we worship as God? Does it really matter whose word becomes law? The difference is stark. “Love your neighbor as you love yourself.”, and its total opposite, “I am the president. I can do whatever I want.”

Well, yes, Mr. Trump, you can, but there are always consequences which follow.

  1. We Who Wrestle With God, Dr. Jordan B. Peterson, Penguin Random House, 2024, page xxvii.
    ↩︎