Dearest Frank! I am wondering how you came to your hopeful conclusion? My hope has always been in Almighty God regardless of how all this plays out but I watched Los Angeles burn to the ground the last few days in an obviously calculated ritual designed to further the agenda of the demon who run the world! And I saw a picture of an early 19 hundreds copy of a NWO map where Canada, Greenland, and Mexico were all part of America so I am wondering what makes you think we are winning? I grant you that many many people have woken up to the twisted psyop we have been subjected to but so far I fail to see how that makes us the winners since their agenda is being carried on as we speak! Please infom me Frank! I truly want to be able to breath easy and pass on good news to people concerning the demise of the Orwellian horror show we never ask for to begin with! Love Judith
The liberal aspect is over. The globalism is going digital. You will get a very different world, starting now, and the pace of change will be rapid.
This has not happened overnight. I’ll put a piece up soon which shows my working, but I thought it important to simply present a brief summary of world affairs. The liberal idea, its policies and its project are all dead. It has no money and no future - and no one really believes in it anymore.
I’m always giving the author a hard time about the optimism. This is a quote that captures the part of Frank’s argument that I wholeheartedly agree with:
“ power is habitual obedience; regime change is a structured discontinuity in the habits of obedience. It must never be forgotten that regime change is a change to obeying something else”.
What comes next? You see, the Fantasia has been outed, the lies cannot be laundered and world view can’t be resurrected. The author makes this argument very very well.
But I think it’s a leap to assume a return to a reality based order of ordinary maintenance governance. People love the fancy stuff.
Why assume it’s going to go well? Of course you can say why assume it’s going to go poorly. Touché.
Where is the Zeitgeist going to go? Let’s hope Frank is right. He certainly more learned than me.
Well, ordinary people realise nothing works, and I have pointed out for a long time that anyone with smarts to offer a programme of common sense politics will clean up. They are, and they will. "Stop the madness" is a powerful message in a political asylum run wild.
There are also a lot of capable people, former and future members of a professional and political class, who have been excluded by the loyalty system of hyperliberalism. It has discriminated against native wit and basic competence.
It is impossible to continue when nothing works, and when your project to replace everything following a "managed decline" has met hard limits in reality which its force and persuasion cannot exceed. Time's up.
I despise optimism. I think this is mainly a practical and not really an ideological correction for the time being.
I wouldn’t say I’m happy - killing as a last resort - but I am sanguine. Sanguine because winning is the essence of life, not truth or justice, those things are beyond our grasp. Like gravity, it’s how it works, even a cursory glance at history shows this. Our presentism is the flaw, so we make things worse. Tough luck I say.
Essentialist, nice, good thought, maybe the killing is also essential, an element in our wiring: inescapable.
Your caveat emptor is the truth of our circumstance . The entire suite of military Intel and actions are being deployed within nations against national populations. This is the future now.
Oh I didn't mean to suggest you are happy about about the killing business, but with the populism with which it is to be packaged. Sorry. I ought to have said so. I am not trying to be snide.
The rights-based liberal stuff is all getting binned. "Human rights", "international law", "migrant rights", "trans rights" and so on.
I think we agree about the digital deep state lol (notlol). I agree that man will never tire of killing - I think it should be kept to a minimum, rather than monetised - mind you.
OK, just read it, much to think about. I am populist and Zionist leaning. I know they tend to kill a lot of people. Somehow that doesn’t bother me too much. They seem to be killing the right people. Am I allowed to say that? Palestinian warriors chose to shelter with and surrounded by their women and children so women and children get killed. Unfortunate.
Well in that case I say you are going to be very happy with everything you are going to get.
People who aren't Zionists will probably be happy with nine tenths of what is taking possession of politics.
Of course you are allowed to say that. I am not a fan of Islam either, but as an essentialist think human life has value regardless of whether I like the person in particular.
Caveat emptor - the technology being used to automate this process in Israel is - as usual - coming to a country near you.
I also deserve to be given a hard time. So does anyone selling ideas, whether they take your money or not. Your time is more precious than your cash, and what you entertain in your mind is ultimately what helps or harms you.
we could certainly do with a Christian Revival Movement full of proponents of Muscular Christianity to rise up against the hordes. (I'm not religious and never thought I'd find myself wishing for Victorian Christians but, there you go, I really want to be living in a fully Christian country again)
My concern is I see a sort of celebritizing of “Christianity” in the last year. But it’s either Protestant, or a type of gnostic redefinition of God. Sports athletes, YouTube influencers, actors etc.
Even atheists such as Dawkins have made comment about the utility of Christian values (now that he sees his country overrun with immigration)
It seems that broader society is being funneled into this modern Jesus Revolution but not in the true salvific/repentant way.
Oh I agree even more so - now that I see what you mean. Dawkins’ “cultural Christianity” is nothing new - Matthew Arnold recommended this in the 19th century. It led to the “Christianity absent Christ” we now inhabit, which people like Dawkins do not know because they haven’t read him.
Instead of the high culture of poetry and classical music imagined by Arnold we have sports and celebrities to replace the divine.
Celebrities like Dawkins, like the gnostic Zionist Peterson, and the rest of the range of products from the same process.
Re Dawkins - it's easy to be an atheist in a Christian world! Modern Christianity doesn't really mind so long as you're polite about it. Imagine being an atheist in a Muslim world! And being an atheist in an Atheist world has no meaning, expecially if you don't want to parade around in your knickers, taking drugs and molesting children or whatever the latest "thing" is.
That would be the best thing ever!!! real priest, though no faggots to rape boys. It was because they hired gay guys and they have to not make that mistake again. And they even covered up for them.
I’m glad you liked it Mr Cook. Will show my working soon. There is no false hope here - just a logical conclusion. The argument with reality has finally been lost. This was the liberal idea
A fantastic article, Frank! And how I enjoyed watching your presentation; you were enlivened! Animated! A departure from what I see on LSN. Makes me wanna wrap you up & put you in my pocket!
Thanks so much again, Frank! What I really appreciate in your posts is not just the baring of truth that so many refuse to know and want to keep burying their heads in the sand about -- but you also give us not just HOPE from a truly Christian, Catholic perspective, but also, ACTION.
Oh happy new year to you too Teresa! The least we can do is to consider the captured and fractured as casualties - and to become social missionaries to help them. You can gel them personally, or practically by recommending better patterns of living - or even better politics and meanings by which to live.
This wa not my idea at first but it is a very good one and we can all do our bit.
OK, I’m sending this out to Kevin my Iranian new Canadian and Larry and Rob couple of corn feed white boys.
Canada is, I am afraid, sui generis, empty and abundant with resources yet culturally bereft, largely a void we may struggle. Ours is a tenuous place.
You say the death of liberalism is not a return because we were always there, just buried alive under the fantasia. But what of a void like Canada, where do we go? Our cultural genocide was achieved. There is nothing left. We must create anew, Canada is the quintessence of liberalism’s destruction.
Fortissax and John Carter have presented some good thoughts for y'all. Us Americans will probably splinter into regions. Appalachia has a much different perspective than say NE Yankees.
So, what you say, this splintering - no significant civic nationalism to hold America or Canada together - is that at odds with our author’s assessment? I guess it is not at odds if you accept that we are returning to “normalcy”, away from liberalism’s distortion, but it will be a new version, a splintered version.
Now Trump's desire for a super-state is another possibility. For the US, it's when the debt bomb detonates; delaying it by adding territory and playing currency games is one way to push a splintering off. I'm not familiar with Canadian politics but there definitely seems to be a substantial rural/urban divide then there's the Quebecois. I think Frank is saying the illusion of Liberal Democracy is ending and the Globalists will be more open about the control. Look at the revelation of a "social credit score" on X.
Absolutely, hence my comment about splitting into regions. I suspect Canada may have something similar occur. The suppressed Heritage cultures will change and become something of their own. What unified Americans is largely gone; civic nationalism only works when the majority identity maintains itself.
I will go on about this (inevitably) in more detail - but in short, no. At least - for now.
Almost every populist party adjacent to or in power is a Zionist party. Populism is not a coherent ideology - it is a rejection of liberalism. See Bukele, Milei, Wilders, the AfD, Meloni, Orban, Farage, Robinson and of course the increasingly overt Zionism signalled from the Trump camp, whose faction have received over half a billion dollars from the Adelsons in the past nine years.
Some of this alliance with Zionism is expediency - the alliance of the new with an established power structure - economic, military and of political patronage - inherited from and increasingly antipathetic to the old.
Some of it is power. Partly a marriage of convenience if we are to be generous. Most people will likely be content to see the “hyperliberal” lunacy vanish from their lives. When it has, the question of alignment with the state of Israel and its worldview and religion will likely become a stress point in the new nationally “based” dispensation.
Censorship and so on will probably shore this up, but how long that lasts relies on the refinement of the new digital-global algorithm of governance - which is itself a technique being perpetually improved.
Israel is a hard sell these days, and the method of criminalising anyone who accuses it of what it has done is rather played out. A new technique is emerging, which is invisible and expressed through predictive AI and improving automated mimicry of human behaviour.
Spend more time offline, it helps, and help others to do so.
Zionism, Communism, and Judaism are one in the same, but each with its own agents and marketing campaigns. Collectively, at least in the near term, they want whitey eliminated, achieved by desecrating his culture and destroying femininity and the traditional family unit. The matriarchy has replaced the patriarchy, transforming the West into a fetid stew of weakness, degeneracy, and decay. This is the jew world order I speak of.
Well I did write myself that the pillars of western politics - the frame of the overton window if you like - are Bolshevism and Zionism.
This is rather heavy weather but I would make a case that the neoconservative persuasion was one of Bolshevist permanent upheaval and internationalisation of power by force and propaganda. For instance.
These things get refined, so the Bolshevism present in the permanent reform of Blairism (the template for post 1990s western liberal democracies in Europe) was not identical to that of Mr Bronshtein. Political technique is constantly refined to produce a standard result. What result? Look around you.
There is no penalty for the blasphemy of Christ. There are words you can say which will end your career and your liberty - if not also your life.
I’ve been reading this message about dying liberalism from a variety of people lately and I pray pray pray that it’s true. I can’t stand another minute of this hypocrisy. This has to stop.
We have had 2000 years of being gaslit by the idea of a god who made us in his own image. Apparently god is a human.
Although I do not believe that children should be sexualised in any way I do believe that going back to a 2000 year old idea that has created more death and destruction then a guy wearing a silly suit is just more gaslighting.
CHange your headline to "Liberalism and monotheism is dead".
The natural word is god. You only have to immerse yourself in a non synthetic world to no this.
If you're not an essentialist there is no basis for reality beyond words, which explain norms, which are simply what is normalised at the time.
This means that in a world absent God, human nature and the meanings by which we live are simply expressed in terms of fashion. They are changeless, as opposed to what is fashionable.
What is the essential, changeless nature of things? People end up with God or "the cosmos", the Tao, or some similar word for everything that says nothing from beginning to end. What is yours?
The world is not absent of god. The natural world is god.
Pretending god is one species, human, is much more about gaslighting humans into thinking they are special and above all other species.
History tells us that the human is only exceptional in two areas. The destruction of all other species and the completely unreasonable cognition we are born with. If god is human and acts like a human then he is a Psychopath.
The natural god works for all living creatures and is so deep in its understanding that it can modify and change the amount and quality of things needed for all species to thrive.
A human does not have this ability so therefore a god that human does not have that ability either.
Change based on synthetics is an example of why a human cannot be god.
It sounds like you're a pantheist. I think the word "vitalist" is back in vogue.
This romance with the indifferent did not go well for Wordsworth. He realised he simply infused the world with his own passionate imagination - which is what the Prelude is about.
Indigenous cultures have been Pantheists for much longer then the current idea of monotheists.
The idea of working within natures constraints has existed for much longer then this idea of human exceptionalism.
Rome only took on monotheism to extend the life of a dying empire and it did not work. Anthropology was already taking its toll on the elite of the time.
The Indifference you talk about is more evidence of your ignorance of 60 to 70% of the history of the human race. What makes it worse is your arrogance of this ignorance. 2000 years of monotheism against 50 000 years or more of pantheism. Do you really think monothiests will be a thing in 50 000 years. I suggest monothiests will have made this planet inhabitable. Not through climate change but through consumption and implementing a synthetic culture
Tell the people straight. You have little interest in god. You gaslight for personal gain. Play on peoples emotions for power and control.
Snake oil salesman.
Please answer this question for me.
If you god is Omnipotent ho doe he know what day it is?
The idea of Omnipotence is really not reasonable is it.
I don't think there is any need to insult me. I am not a snake oil salesman, as I am not hawking a remedy of my own concoction.
I think your argument is with a composition you have made yourself, both of reality and of my work.
For instance, if you look at the reign of Julian the Apostate I do not think it supports your charge that "Rome only took on monotheism to extend the life of a dying empire and it did not work."
Nor do I think the conversion of Constantine a political power move, as Christianity was seen as seditious at best at the time.
There are limits to pantheism which have been reached by the peoples - and people - who have turned and returned to it. The Club of Rome was founded by one - Maurice Strong - for example.
I mentioned Wordsworth because his Lake Poet Romanticism was of a piece with pantheism. Like John Ruskin, Wordsworth turned to nature for meaning and a sense of union. Wordsworth realised his Romanticism - his sense of oneness with nature - was a passionate delusion. He had imagined the mountain loved him back, if you like, when all along nature is simply indifferent to us.
I am not a primitivist. I do not think Man fell from a precivilised paradise into the ruin of civilisation - as did Romantics like Rousseau.
I think this sort of sentiment revolutionary - as did the architects of the French revolution. It says "destroy" - promising to make better.
"Tell the people straight. You have little interest in god. You gaslight for personal gain. Play on peoples emotions for power and control."
As I often remind readers, I am a traditional Catholic and have organised my life and that of three generations in my family around our formation in the Catholic tradition.
If I were interested in making money I would sell doom, which sells better, or become a Zionist, which is a passport to influence regardless of merit.
I regularly give away free subscriptions to people who cannot pay to read my work, and will respond in detail to questions without payment, as I am doing here.
I do not think your final question about the power of God makes sense. I don't mean to be rude. I do not see how your conclusion follows from the composition of your question.
I think the ontological argument is sound, which is one of four arguments usually advanced to people who ask for them. Arguments for the existence of God, that is.
People have said these things which you and I say for a very long time, and it is worth looking at what they meant, and what difference their beliefs made to life at the time - and afterwards.
I do not believe in a pantheist precivilised paradise, and think this a myth created by people in an age of advancing technology and urbanisation.
See the book "War Before Civilisation". The primitive world was no Eden.
In short, to a man with a hammer everything looks like a nail. I think this is why you call me a "gaslighter", as this is the lamp which lights your way.
What I mean by that is that you quote people who were published in the history books. You worship other human beings as gods when these people were marketed through the media of their time.
To truly understand why monotheism has taken over from Pantheism is to study Anthropology. The study of human actions and cognition. Quoting a few people does not give an accurate understanding of the flaws within society. All you are doing is giving someones opinion.
To believe primitive times were perfect is also very odd. I suggest that if heaven does exist the Anthropological behavior, of those entering, would be complain about the colour of the curtains and the actions of the fellow angels in heaven. Once again Anthropology of the human race.
You belief’s gaslight people into believing something that cannot, and is not, a possibility. The human cognition cannot create a heaven. We are not capable of it. IF your god is human then he or she does not have the ability to do what you say he or she does.
The synthetic idea of academia has created a rabbit hole of selected knowledge. Knowledge approved by a few for the many. The Democrats and the woke have been found out for the gaslighting of their flawed narrative. That does not mean that the Republicans, and the current push towards organised religion for a basis of what is moral or not, are any better. your beliefs are for the benefit of a few. They are not reasonable and not possible. Human cognition is not capable of creating what you gas light to the people as being possible.
This is why I mentioned the snake oil salesman. They make promises that they cannot deliver on just like the teachings of Christianity.
The natural world is the real conservative as it is currently trying to find a balance for the survival of all species. It does not want change. It will alter the weather patterns to allow life to exist. Not just for humans but for all species. The species of us humans may be a mistake or nature created us for a reason. Maybe we are a part of those cyclical changes that are needed to help other life forms that we know nothing about to exist.
Notice how I theorise and not tell. i ask questions. I do not say that I know the forth or fifth dimensions. I am only guessing. If you wish to loose the label of snake oil salesman. Until you change your rhetoric to that of a theory of a Christian god then you are only gaslighting.
Faith is not something that a monotheist can experience. All human being can do that. You do not have faith as a Christian. You have a belief. Nothing more.
Christian values will not save the USA from its current trajectory. Anthropology will.
Good, hopeful essay.
We also need a reconquista of the Roman Catholic Church from the clutches of the sashaying effeminates now in control.
Light in the loafers. 👞
lol
Yeah no shit....fortunately these old queens are dying out AND there is a new cadre of "real men" priest coming up.
Dearest Frank! I am wondering how you came to your hopeful conclusion? My hope has always been in Almighty God regardless of how all this plays out but I watched Los Angeles burn to the ground the last few days in an obviously calculated ritual designed to further the agenda of the demon who run the world! And I saw a picture of an early 19 hundreds copy of a NWO map where Canada, Greenland, and Mexico were all part of America so I am wondering what makes you think we are winning? I grant you that many many people have woken up to the twisted psyop we have been subjected to but so far I fail to see how that makes us the winners since their agenda is being carried on as we speak! Please infom me Frank! I truly want to be able to breath easy and pass on good news to people concerning the demise of the Orwellian horror show we never ask for to begin with! Love Judith
The liberal aspect is over. The globalism is going digital. You will get a very different world, starting now, and the pace of change will be rapid.
This has not happened overnight. I’ll put a piece up soon which shows my working, but I thought it important to simply present a brief summary of world affairs. The liberal idea, its policies and its project are all dead. It has no money and no future - and no one really believes in it anymore.
Here's the article which goes into the new order beyond the liberal one
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/liberal-globalism-may-be-coming-to-an-end-what-should-we-expect-to-replace-it/
I’m always giving the author a hard time about the optimism. This is a quote that captures the part of Frank’s argument that I wholeheartedly agree with:
“ power is habitual obedience; regime change is a structured discontinuity in the habits of obedience. It must never be forgotten that regime change is a change to obeying something else”.
What comes next? You see, the Fantasia has been outed, the lies cannot be laundered and world view can’t be resurrected. The author makes this argument very very well.
But I think it’s a leap to assume a return to a reality based order of ordinary maintenance governance. People love the fancy stuff.
Why assume it’s going to go well? Of course you can say why assume it’s going to go poorly. Touché.
Where is the Zeitgeist going to go? Let’s hope Frank is right. He certainly more learned than me.
Well, ordinary people realise nothing works, and I have pointed out for a long time that anyone with smarts to offer a programme of common sense politics will clean up. They are, and they will. "Stop the madness" is a powerful message in a political asylum run wild.
There are also a lot of capable people, former and future members of a professional and political class, who have been excluded by the loyalty system of hyperliberalism. It has discriminated against native wit and basic competence.
It is impossible to continue when nothing works, and when your project to replace everything following a "managed decline" has met hard limits in reality which its force and persuasion cannot exceed. Time's up.
I despise optimism. I think this is mainly a practical and not really an ideological correction for the time being.
I wouldn’t say I’m happy - killing as a last resort - but I am sanguine. Sanguine because winning is the essence of life, not truth or justice, those things are beyond our grasp. Like gravity, it’s how it works, even a cursory glance at history shows this. Our presentism is the flaw, so we make things worse. Tough luck I say.
Essentialist, nice, good thought, maybe the killing is also essential, an element in our wiring: inescapable.
Your caveat emptor is the truth of our circumstance . The entire suite of military Intel and actions are being deployed within nations against national populations. This is the future now.
Oh I didn't mean to suggest you are happy about about the killing business, but with the populism with which it is to be packaged. Sorry. I ought to have said so. I am not trying to be snide.
The rights-based liberal stuff is all getting binned. "Human rights", "international law", "migrant rights", "trans rights" and so on.
I think we agree about the digital deep state lol (notlol). I agree that man will never tire of killing - I think it should be kept to a minimum, rather than monetised - mind you.
Perfect
Here's the article I mentioned in which I show some of my working to support the claim that liberalism is dead
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/liberal-globalism-may-be-coming-to-an-end-what-should-we-expect-to-replace-it/
OK, just read it, much to think about. I am populist and Zionist leaning. I know they tend to kill a lot of people. Somehow that doesn’t bother me too much. They seem to be killing the right people. Am I allowed to say that? Palestinian warriors chose to shelter with and surrounded by their women and children so women and children get killed. Unfortunate.
Well in that case I say you are going to be very happy with everything you are going to get.
People who aren't Zionists will probably be happy with nine tenths of what is taking possession of politics.
Of course you are allowed to say that. I am not a fan of Islam either, but as an essentialist think human life has value regardless of whether I like the person in particular.
Caveat emptor - the technology being used to automate this process in Israel is - as usual - coming to a country near you.
Shoot, I replied above
I also deserve to be given a hard time. So does anyone selling ideas, whether they take your money or not. Your time is more precious than your cash, and what you entertain in your mind is ultimately what helps or harms you.
Buyer beware.
"meeting the man of the way on the path
greet him neither with gestures nor with words
give him an uppercut
he will understand you at once"
It could be a ritual or a judgement. I suppose it’s the same either way.
we could certainly do with a Christian Revival Movement full of proponents of Muscular Christianity to rise up against the hordes. (I'm not religious and never thought I'd find myself wishing for Victorian Christians but, there you go, I really want to be living in a fully Christian country again)
Well it’s that or Satan lol (notlol)
The adaption of the “utility of Christianity” is not enough.
A global repentance and obeying of Gods commands is what is needed
Yes, and precisely said. This what is best in the end. Here I am on about beginnings.
You are probably going to save more souls by reorientating society from Satan to God.
I mean, the new dispensation does not produce an instant revival of Christendom. It is a start.
I do think people are realising generally what the alternative to a civilisation based on Christ represents in reality.
Nothing, it turns out, has a voice.
My concern is I see a sort of celebritizing of “Christianity” in the last year. But it’s either Protestant, or a type of gnostic redefinition of God. Sports athletes, YouTube influencers, actors etc.
Even atheists such as Dawkins have made comment about the utility of Christian values (now that he sees his country overrun with immigration)
It seems that broader society is being funneled into this modern Jesus Revolution but not in the true salvific/repentant way.
This could be the last great deception.
Oh I agree even more so - now that I see what you mean. Dawkins’ “cultural Christianity” is nothing new - Matthew Arnold recommended this in the 19th century. It led to the “Christianity absent Christ” we now inhabit, which people like Dawkins do not know because they haven’t read him.
Instead of the high culture of poetry and classical music imagined by Arnold we have sports and celebrities to replace the divine.
Celebrities like Dawkins, like the gnostic Zionist Peterson, and the rest of the range of products from the same process.
Anyhow this article is great. I think it opens up interesting conversations and gives us all something to honestly think about deeply
Re Dawkins - it's easy to be an atheist in a Christian world! Modern Christianity doesn't really mind so long as you're polite about it. Imagine being an atheist in a Muslim world! And being an atheist in an Atheist world has no meaning, expecially if you don't want to parade around in your knickers, taking drugs and molesting children or whatever the latest "thing" is.
Stuffy speaks for me, perfect.
That would be the best thing ever!!! real priest, though no faggots to rape boys. It was because they hired gay guys and they have to not make that mistake again. And they even covered up for them.
Thanks again Frank. Brilliant, cogent, heartwarming. Peace, my brother.
I’m glad you liked it Mr Cook. Will show my working soon. There is no false hope here - just a logical conclusion. The argument with reality has finally been lost. This was the liberal idea
I hope you're right.
But it's taken decades to get here, and the rot is so endemic it'll take decades to roll it back.
If we all survive WWIII, that is - we don't seem to be wise enough or clever enough to know how to avoid it.
And you wonder, how in the 21st century, long after the Age of Enlightenment, did it come to this?
I prefer “the deplorable Enlightenment” lol.
That’s how we got here.
"Our civilization is in the process of de transitioning": sheer poetry, as is usual from this writer!
And with a smile Satan sends them salutations
I wish I could be optimistic but I am not.
If Trump settles the Ukraine conflict, that will only mean that the empire has abandoned that front against Russia in favor of another.
That might mean a widening of Israel's expansion to points closer to Ukraine or even including it.
Those who dismiss such notions should simply study up on the West's long term plan to conquer Russia and extract its enormous mineral wealth.
We're at the start of a long war, I'm afraid.
A fantastic article, Frank! And how I enjoyed watching your presentation; you were enlivened! Animated! A departure from what I see on LSN. Makes me wanna wrap you up & put you in my pocket!
Well I am pocket sized so that might work lol
Thank you Jeron. I have been told to do more videos by people who have seen this one.
Thanks so much again, Frank! What I really appreciate in your posts is not just the baring of truth that so many refuse to know and want to keep burying their heads in the sand about -- but you also give us not just HOPE from a truly Christian, Catholic perspective, but also, ACTION.
Happy New Year!
Oh happy new year to you too Teresa! The least we can do is to consider the captured and fractured as casualties - and to become social missionaries to help them. You can gel them personally, or practically by recommending better patterns of living - or even better politics and meanings by which to live.
This wa not my idea at first but it is a very good one and we can all do our bit.
OK, I’m sending this out to Kevin my Iranian new Canadian and Larry and Rob couple of corn feed white boys.
Canada is, I am afraid, sui generis, empty and abundant with resources yet culturally bereft, largely a void we may struggle. Ours is a tenuous place.
You say the death of liberalism is not a return because we were always there, just buried alive under the fantasia. But what of a void like Canada, where do we go? Our cultural genocide was achieved. There is nothing left. We must create anew, Canada is the quintessence of liberalism’s destruction.
Fortissax and John Carter have presented some good thoughts for y'all. Us Americans will probably splinter into regions. Appalachia has a much different perspective than say NE Yankees.
Yes, I’m in the Appalachian area far away from New England where I spent most of my life.
It’s much better here.
John Carter is one of my biggest influences. I would say my argument about Canada applies to the United States equally. Yes?
So, what you say, this splintering - no significant civic nationalism to hold America or Canada together - is that at odds with our author’s assessment? I guess it is not at odds if you accept that we are returning to “normalcy”, away from liberalism’s distortion, but it will be a new version, a splintered version.
Now Trump's desire for a super-state is another possibility. For the US, it's when the debt bomb detonates; delaying it by adding territory and playing currency games is one way to push a splintering off. I'm not familiar with Canadian politics but there definitely seems to be a substantial rural/urban divide then there's the Quebecois. I think Frank is saying the illusion of Liberal Democracy is ending and the Globalists will be more open about the control. Look at the revelation of a "social credit score" on X.
Absolutely, hence my comment about splitting into regions. I suspect Canada may have something similar occur. The suppressed Heritage cultures will change and become something of their own. What unified Americans is largely gone; civic nationalism only works when the majority identity maintains itself.
The place we must now go is within. Please check this out:
https://montanarcc.substack.com/p/who-is-the-historical-jesus-bo-yin
What you are really describing is the death of the jew world order.
I will go on about this (inevitably) in more detail - but in short, no. At least - for now.
Almost every populist party adjacent to or in power is a Zionist party. Populism is not a coherent ideology - it is a rejection of liberalism. See Bukele, Milei, Wilders, the AfD, Meloni, Orban, Farage, Robinson and of course the increasingly overt Zionism signalled from the Trump camp, whose faction have received over half a billion dollars from the Adelsons in the past nine years.
Some of this alliance with Zionism is expediency - the alliance of the new with an established power structure - economic, military and of political patronage - inherited from and increasingly antipathetic to the old.
Some of it is power. Partly a marriage of convenience if we are to be generous. Most people will likely be content to see the “hyperliberal” lunacy vanish from their lives. When it has, the question of alignment with the state of Israel and its worldview and religion will likely become a stress point in the new nationally “based” dispensation.
Censorship and so on will probably shore this up, but how long that lasts relies on the refinement of the new digital-global algorithm of governance - which is itself a technique being perpetually improved.
Israel is a hard sell these days, and the method of criminalising anyone who accuses it of what it has done is rather played out. A new technique is emerging, which is invisible and expressed through predictive AI and improving automated mimicry of human behaviour.
Spend more time offline, it helps, and help others to do so.
Zionism, Communism, and Judaism are one in the same, but each with its own agents and marketing campaigns. Collectively, at least in the near term, they want whitey eliminated, achieved by desecrating his culture and destroying femininity and the traditional family unit. The matriarchy has replaced the patriarchy, transforming the West into a fetid stew of weakness, degeneracy, and decay. This is the jew world order I speak of.
Well I did write myself that the pillars of western politics - the frame of the overton window if you like - are Bolshevism and Zionism.
This is rather heavy weather but I would make a case that the neoconservative persuasion was one of Bolshevist permanent upheaval and internationalisation of power by force and propaganda. For instance.
These things get refined, so the Bolshevism present in the permanent reform of Blairism (the template for post 1990s western liberal democracies in Europe) was not identical to that of Mr Bronshtein. Political technique is constantly refined to produce a standard result. What result? Look around you.
There is no penalty for the blasphemy of Christ. There are words you can say which will end your career and your liberty - if not also your life.
"There are words you can say which will end your career and your liberty - if not also your life"
This, in the year of our Lord 2024. Something's gonna give.
Clever but…..
I’ve been reading this message about dying liberalism from a variety of people lately and I pray pray pray that it’s true. I can’t stand another minute of this hypocrisy. This has to stop.
Hopeful and heartwarming thanks Frank 🙏
Your writing is so beautiful, wise and inspiring, Frank. Thank you! 🙏
We have had 2000 years of being gaslit by the idea of a god who made us in his own image. Apparently god is a human.
Although I do not believe that children should be sexualised in any way I do believe that going back to a 2000 year old idea that has created more death and destruction then a guy wearing a silly suit is just more gaslighting.
CHange your headline to "Liberalism and monotheism is dead".
The natural word is god. You only have to immerse yourself in a non synthetic world to no this.
If you're not an essentialist there is no basis for reality beyond words, which explain norms, which are simply what is normalised at the time.
This means that in a world absent God, human nature and the meanings by which we live are simply expressed in terms of fashion. They are changeless, as opposed to what is fashionable.
What is the essential, changeless nature of things? People end up with God or "the cosmos", the Tao, or some similar word for everything that says nothing from beginning to end. What is yours?
The world is not absent of god. The natural world is god.
Pretending god is one species, human, is much more about gaslighting humans into thinking they are special and above all other species.
History tells us that the human is only exceptional in two areas. The destruction of all other species and the completely unreasonable cognition we are born with. If god is human and acts like a human then he is a Psychopath.
The natural god works for all living creatures and is so deep in its understanding that it can modify and change the amount and quality of things needed for all species to thrive.
A human does not have this ability so therefore a god that human does not have that ability either.
Change based on synthetics is an example of why a human cannot be god.
It sounds like you're a pantheist. I think the word "vitalist" is back in vogue.
This romance with the indifferent did not go well for Wordsworth. He realised he simply infused the world with his own passionate imagination - which is what the Prelude is about.
Indigenous cultures have been Pantheists for much longer then the current idea of monotheists.
The idea of working within natures constraints has existed for much longer then this idea of human exceptionalism.
Rome only took on monotheism to extend the life of a dying empire and it did not work. Anthropology was already taking its toll on the elite of the time.
The Indifference you talk about is more evidence of your ignorance of 60 to 70% of the history of the human race. What makes it worse is your arrogance of this ignorance. 2000 years of monotheism against 50 000 years or more of pantheism. Do you really think monothiests will be a thing in 50 000 years. I suggest monothiests will have made this planet inhabitable. Not through climate change but through consumption and implementing a synthetic culture
Tell the people straight. You have little interest in god. You gaslight for personal gain. Play on peoples emotions for power and control.
Snake oil salesman.
Please answer this question for me.
If you god is Omnipotent ho doe he know what day it is?
The idea of Omnipotence is really not reasonable is it.
I don't think there is any need to insult me. I am not a snake oil salesman, as I am not hawking a remedy of my own concoction.
I think your argument is with a composition you have made yourself, both of reality and of my work.
For instance, if you look at the reign of Julian the Apostate I do not think it supports your charge that "Rome only took on monotheism to extend the life of a dying empire and it did not work."
Nor do I think the conversion of Constantine a political power move, as Christianity was seen as seditious at best at the time.
There are limits to pantheism which have been reached by the peoples - and people - who have turned and returned to it. The Club of Rome was founded by one - Maurice Strong - for example.
I mentioned Wordsworth because his Lake Poet Romanticism was of a piece with pantheism. Like John Ruskin, Wordsworth turned to nature for meaning and a sense of union. Wordsworth realised his Romanticism - his sense of oneness with nature - was a passionate delusion. He had imagined the mountain loved him back, if you like, when all along nature is simply indifferent to us.
I am not a primitivist. I do not think Man fell from a precivilised paradise into the ruin of civilisation - as did Romantics like Rousseau.
I think this sort of sentiment revolutionary - as did the architects of the French revolution. It says "destroy" - promising to make better.
"Tell the people straight. You have little interest in god. You gaslight for personal gain. Play on peoples emotions for power and control."
As I often remind readers, I am a traditional Catholic and have organised my life and that of three generations in my family around our formation in the Catholic tradition.
If I were interested in making money I would sell doom, which sells better, or become a Zionist, which is a passport to influence regardless of merit.
I regularly give away free subscriptions to people who cannot pay to read my work, and will respond in detail to questions without payment, as I am doing here.
I do not think your final question about the power of God makes sense. I don't mean to be rude. I do not see how your conclusion follows from the composition of your question.
I think the ontological argument is sound, which is one of four arguments usually advanced to people who ask for them. Arguments for the existence of God, that is.
People have said these things which you and I say for a very long time, and it is worth looking at what they meant, and what difference their beliefs made to life at the time - and afterwards.
I do not believe in a pantheist precivilised paradise, and think this a myth created by people in an age of advancing technology and urbanisation.
See the book "War Before Civilisation". The primitive world was no Eden.
In short, to a man with a hammer everything looks like a nail. I think this is why you call me a "gaslighter", as this is the lamp which lights your way.
Your reply explains my point further so thankyou.
What I mean by that is that you quote people who were published in the history books. You worship other human beings as gods when these people were marketed through the media of their time.
To truly understand why monotheism has taken over from Pantheism is to study Anthropology. The study of human actions and cognition. Quoting a few people does not give an accurate understanding of the flaws within society. All you are doing is giving someones opinion.
To believe primitive times were perfect is also very odd. I suggest that if heaven does exist the Anthropological behavior, of those entering, would be complain about the colour of the curtains and the actions of the fellow angels in heaven. Once again Anthropology of the human race.
You belief’s gaslight people into believing something that cannot, and is not, a possibility. The human cognition cannot create a heaven. We are not capable of it. IF your god is human then he or she does not have the ability to do what you say he or she does.
The synthetic idea of academia has created a rabbit hole of selected knowledge. Knowledge approved by a few for the many. The Democrats and the woke have been found out for the gaslighting of their flawed narrative. That does not mean that the Republicans, and the current push towards organised religion for a basis of what is moral or not, are any better. your beliefs are for the benefit of a few. They are not reasonable and not possible. Human cognition is not capable of creating what you gas light to the people as being possible.
This is why I mentioned the snake oil salesman. They make promises that they cannot deliver on just like the teachings of Christianity.
The natural world is the real conservative as it is currently trying to find a balance for the survival of all species. It does not want change. It will alter the weather patterns to allow life to exist. Not just for humans but for all species. The species of us humans may be a mistake or nature created us for a reason. Maybe we are a part of those cyclical changes that are needed to help other life forms that we know nothing about to exist.
Notice how I theorise and not tell. i ask questions. I do not say that I know the forth or fifth dimensions. I am only guessing. If you wish to loose the label of snake oil salesman. Until you change your rhetoric to that of a theory of a Christian god then you are only gaslighting.
Faith is not something that a monotheist can experience. All human being can do that. You do not have faith as a Christian. You have a belief. Nothing more.
Christian values will not save the USA from its current trajectory. Anthropology will.