Category Archives: Uncategorized

What’s wrong (diabolical) about negative interest rates

14 Wednesday Aug 2019

Posted by in Faith, Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , ,

iu-16

#Toldya : Negative Interest Rates; Highway to a Cashless, Statist Hell | from Barnhardt.biz

Negative Nominal Interest Rates: Highway to a Cashless, Statist Hell”.  Read up, Buttercup.

(Originally penned and posted in June ARSH 2014)

I warned about this in part two of my 2.5 hour Economics Video Presentation back in November of ARSH 2012, and, sure enough, it has now happened.

Because, as I have been saying all along, for anyone who knows ANYTHING about ANYTHING having to do with economics, finance and/or banking, and who does not have their brain bucket completely and firmly inserted up their rectal vault, it is obvious what is happening and how the chain of events will unfold.  If a mouthy broad with a mere bachelor’s degree in animal husbandry from a land-grant university can see this stuff coming years in advance, what excuse do your so-called leaders and media “experts” have?   Oh, yeah.  I forgot.  They’re all either teetering on the precipice of mental retardation, or are black-hearted diabolical narcissist psychopath whores.  Or, as with Nancy Pelosi and countless others, both.

Mario Draghi, chief psychopath of the European Central Bank went full-stupid on June 5th, ARSH 2014 and announced mandated NEGATIVE INTEREST RATES on the excess reserves of European banks held and the European Central Bank  (which is the equivalent of the Federal Reserve Bank in the U.S.).  What does this mean?  It means that when a European commercial bank deposits excess cash reserves with the ECB, the commercial bank must PAY the ECB to store that money.  The commercial bank does not earn any interest income on that money, it in fact has a percentage of its deposit CONFISCATED from its account every month by the ECB.

The publicly stated rationale behind this negative interest rate paradigm is “stimulus”.  If the banks have to pay to store cash, they will instead lend their excess cash out to customers rather than have a percentage  confiscated every month.  This is utter bee-ess on multiple levels.  These top-tier central bankers know that negative interest rates have NOTHING to do with stimulus, and will, in fact, lead to exactly the opposite.  In fact, they know that the inevitable outcome of negative interest rates is the complete nationalization of the banking sector and total governmental control of all capital flows – which means today a CASHLESS ECONOMY.  Yup.  If you’re interested, I’ll walk you through the chain of events and differentiate between the propaganda that will be used to justify this evil and the reality of how the world actually works.

Banks today are sitting on huge cash reserves because the economy sucks and banks have rightly discerned that lending money into a sucky economy is NOT IN THEIR BEST INTERESTS.  If the economy sucks, then lending money to Joe Schmoe to start a business is likely going to end up in default.  So, if YOU were a bank and your choice was between losing one percent by depositing money at the Central Bank at negative interest, or losing FIFTEEN percent on your loan portfolio because the economy sucks and a high percentage of your borrowers would default on their loans, which would you do?  Well, duh.  You would opt for the SMALLER loss of ONLY one percent, and you would continue to hold cash reserves and be VERY stingy with your loan portfolio.

Okay.  That’s easy to understand, right?  Well, the propaganda coming from the Banksters and willingly regurgitated by the useful idiot (Beta Narcissist) class is that negative interest rates will absolutely, positively result in increased lending by banks and thus “economic stimulus”.  And bear in mind, they have been bleating EXACTLY the same line of crap in regards to “quantitative easing”.  They have been saying for YEARS that all of the money printing done by the Federal Reserve and European Central Bank would provide “stimulus” in the form of increased lending.  And, as we all know, that didn’t happen.  All that has happened is that the Banksters have taken the “new money” printed by the Central Banks and pumped it into the stock and derivatives markets, thus blowing a massive, unprecedented bubble.  But Joe Schmoe still can’t get a loan to open a business.  The evil, malignant Banksters KNOW that the whole stimulus meme is a lie.  The useful idiots (Beta Narcissists and Effeminates) are so indescribably stupid that they can’t comprehend simple logical progressions even when they have a current experiential dataset right in front of their faces that clearly demonstrates the fallacy: not only does QE and other forms of synthetic “liquidity boosting” NOT stimulate the economy, it actually depresses it even more.

So now banks will be even more incentivized to offload cash by plowing it into relatively “safe” paper that has a higher interest yield than the negative rate at the Central Bank.  What does this imply?  Increased demand for Sovereign debt (bonds issued by nations), and derivatives on Sovereign debt.  Now here is where it gets positively sick.  Very soon, banks will be able to borrow money from the “discount window” at the Central Bank at either zero, or at a NEGATIVE rate.  Think about that.  The Central Bank, because the interest rate is negative, actually pays banks to borrow money from them.  And this utter PERVERSITY is the root of the whole satanic mess.  The first mover in all of this is the evil, perverse Central Bank.  The Central Banks are completely content to pay banks to borrow money – a perversity – because the Central Bank doesn’t give a shit.  It can just “PRINT” as much money as it “needs”.  And, as we have discussed at length, the “printing” of money, money being a proxy for the human capacity to labor and create through time, is simply the leveraging of HUMAN LIFE, specifically at this late hour not just the life of every man, woman and child alive today OUTSIDE the oligarch class, but now generations upon generations of human beings who DO NOT YET EXIST, and are thus utterly powerless to object or mount a counter-revolt.

Okay, so now Bank A goes to the discount window and borrows “new money” from the Central Bank at NEGATIVE one percent, which means the loans generates a yield TO THE BORROWER.  Then, Bank A turns around and plows that money, which is already generating a yield in and of itself, into French Sovereign bonds that yield 1.5%.  Bank A does this because it is certain that France will never be allowed to default – the Central Bank will just keep printing money and printing money to keep France (or any other country) from defaulting on its debt.  So, What is the total yield to Bank A?  The one percent yield on the money borrowed at negative interest from the Central Bank, PLUS the 1.5% yield on the French bonds = +2.5%.  Do you see why this dynamic INCREASES DEAMND for sovereign debt?  It incentivizes governments not to PAY DOWN their debt, but to in fact EXPAND their balance sheets by going deeper into debt.  And because the demand for sovereign debt is increased because there is more money chasing after it, the interest rates are driven DOWN (a lower interest rate is the same thing as higher price on bonds), and thus the politicians tell the people that not only is more government debt good, it is extremely good because “the interest rate is so low”.  And the glassy-eyed sheeple nod passively and return to their tee-vee shows.  Because actually learning and thinking about something that affects everyone on the planet directly is HAAAAAARD.

This will also increase demand for derivatives on sovereign debt (i.e. repurchase agreements and credit default swaps), again, because the banks are quite confident that the Central Banks will never permit a sovereign default.  And who, pray tell, are the main counterparties on almost all sovereign debt derivatives?   J.P. Morgan, Goldman Sachs (Ted Cruz’s wife is a GS executive – just sayin’) and Deutschebank.  Uh-huh.  And where do ALL of the people come from who populate the Central Banks, both in the U.S. and in Europe?  J.P. Morgan, Goldman Sachs (Ted Cruz’s wife is a GS executive who formerly was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations – just sayin’) and Deutschebank. Uh-huh.

Kids, this isn’t terribly complicated.  Really.

Now, to YOU, the people who PAY FOR ALL OF THIS.

Negative interest rates will be a cost to YOU in two ways.  First, the obvious: you will have a confiscatory tax levied on your bank deposits every month – that’s what a negative interest rate is, sweetie.  It is a TAX on the PEOPLE, NOT the banks, because the banks will pass through to the customers the cost for the bank to store reserves at the Central Banks PLUS a margin.

Next, in an economy that is perceived to be relatively stronger or safer (of which the former United States is still at the top of the list because of its size, both economically and militarily) capital will flow IN to that economy, thus causing ASSET BUBBLES and CONSUMER PRICE INFLATION.  Been to the grocery store lately?  Looked into buying any farm ground lately?  Uh-huh.  So when consumer prices inflate, what do banks do to interest rates in order to cover the resulting increased risk in lending to consumers who now are having a much more difficult time making ends meet?  Yep.  They RAISE interest rates to borrowers.  And so therefore a negative interest rate at the Central Bank not only does not stimulate the economy, it increases the contraction and deepens the depression (because let’s face it, if your economy is at the point that the Central Bank is going NEGATIVE on interest rates, honey, yo’ a$$ is already in a DEPRESSION, not a recession).

Now to the big ugly.  Since the Central Bank is, despite any and all lying propaganda to the contrary, a government entity backed fully by the government and thus ultimately backed by the people, and since the Sovereign bond market is also a pure function of the government and thus ultimately backed by the people, when banks receive payment on both their capital borrowed from the Central Bank at negative interest AND receive a positive interest yield on their government bond holdings, that means that THE PEOPLE are PAYING THE BANKS… ON BOTH SIDES.

This is a backdoor way of confiscating collateral from the people and using it to RECAPITALIZE THE BANKS.  And also pay the bankster oligarchs’ eight and nine-figure salaries and compensation packages, which, let’s be honest, is their top priority.

So now you may be thinking that this will cause a feedback loop to occur and rates will continue to be driven more and more negative.  Yes.  Absolutely.  Because the Central Bank will have to keep adjusting its rate down to stay “more negative” than the Sovereign bond and other money markets.

What happens when customer deposit rates go sufficiently negative so as to compel normal people to withdraw their cash from the banks and hold it in cash?  The answer is, the oligarchs will enact government policies outlawing the use of cash.  Think I’m crazy?  Have you tried paying your car insurance bill with cash lately?  Cash.  As in hundred dollar bills.  How about your phone or utility bill?  Guess what.  You can’t.

One of the big reasons why I had to move into the “Van Down by the River” was because I simply COULD NOT FUNCTION using cash.  When I was foreclosed upon because I could not provide the bank with a tax return (because I have declared a tax strike), I began investigating possible rental scenarios in preparing to move.  Kids, you CANNOT rent an apartment “above the table”, pay the utilities on said apartment, insure a vehicle and scores of other necessary expenses in the former U.S. using cash today.  Between IRS liens and mortgage foreclosures, my credit score is destroyed, which also disqualifies above-board rental.  If you think that cash controls and the move to outlaw the use of cash is crazytalk, just stop and think about all of the myriad ways that IT IS ALREADY IMPOSSIBLE to pay with cash.  We’re already 90% of the way there.

So, there would be increased economic depression causing new lending to crater and thus squeezing commercial banks’ margins and causing them to demand a way to dump ALL consumer debt, including business loans, car loans and credit cards, off on the government in the form of guarantees (this is precisely what already happened in the real estate market with almost all mortgages being bundled and dumped onto Fannie and Freddie).  Couple this with the confiscatory tax on deposits AND the paying of banks to borrow from the discount window by the government (aka the people) in order to recapitalize the banks, and what you have is nothing less than the COMPLETE NATIONALIZATION OF THE BANKING SECTOR.  This will inevitably require the outlawing of sovereign currency (cash), which will inevitably lead to the REJECTION of the sovereign currency, and the emergence of a “black” alternative.  We are talking, ladies and gentlemen, about nothing less that the final, complete destruction of the economy, which will inevitably lead to the total collapse of the extant government and what scattered vestiges remain of the Rule of Law.

This, and nothing less than this, has been, is, and will continue to be the explicit goal of the oligarchy that has already overthrown the former United States.  This is part and parcel of the Cloward Piven Strategy.  And it is all happening RIGHT NOW, and given the ignorance and cowardice of the broad populace will not be stopped excluding supernatural intervention, of which we are utterly undeserving.  Get ready, and don’t you dare say you weren’t warned.  And please, spare me any droolingly stupid emails telling me how lending money at interest is evil.  A positive interest rate is ESSENTIAL.  What is immoral, and what actually constitutes the lion’s share of USURY, is UNSECURED lending with no collateral against it.  Well, actually there IS collateral against an unsecured loan:  the future LIFE and productive capacity of the borrower.  THAT is usury.  All Central Bank money printing is therefore USURIOUS because, as we discussed above, it is simply the leveraging of the lives of the people, both present AND future, who comprise the sovereign entity that backs the money of said nationstate.  In other words:  YOU and your descendants for multiple generations hence.

I hope this helps you understand the utterly critical and thoroughly evil concept of negative interest rates.

 

What is America for Mummy?

04 Thursday Jul 2019

Posted by in Church/State, Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on What is America for Mummy?

Tags

, , , ,

633701545The main part of this post is one of the first posts Jessica wrote for my blog. It’s still one of my favorites, and I think it explains why there is something a bit special about America, that has drawn so many to our shores.

Not long after wwe met, Jessica asked me in an email, 

Perhaps the parallel goes beyond just the early pilgrims? America is either a vision of what can be, or it is nothing.

That is the choice we face, and it’s a stark one. Either we are who we have always said we are, or we are just another slave state like Europe.The question must be answered by the American people, we already know what the government thinks, don’t we?

Churchill said, in the Grand Alliance

But I had studied the American Civil War, fought out to the last desperate inch. American blood flowed in my veins. I thought of a remark which Edward Grey had made to me more than thirty years before—that the United States is like “a gigantic boiler. Once the fire is ignited under it there is no limit to the power it can generate.

That is true, we are Americans, we can do anything, if we choose to. Is the fire under the boiler lighted? If it is not, the dream is over. If it is, anything is possible for us.

It strikes me that we often become bogged down in detail, in theory, in the mundane day-to-day stuff that we deal with. We tend to forget what it’s all about, and we shouldn’t. Almost from the beginning, America has been a dream; a dream of freedom above all, but also of material prosperity.

It was such a potent dream that Italian peasants told each other that the streets were paved with gold, although they knew what really awaited them was hard work, and bias against them because of their language and religion but, they came anyway, and if they didn’t have much but hard work and cramped tenements, their children did. And that’s really what the dream has always been: for our children to have a better life than we did. In the nineteenth century, Russian immigrants who had never had anything but black bread, except maybe on holidays, wrote home ecstatically that “in America, we eat wheaten bread every day.” And that too was part of the saga of America.

That’s what we have built over the last 400 years, a dream of freedom, of individual liberty, yes, but also of freedom from material want by virtue of hard work. And you know, as Jess is going to tell you again here, that is really pretty damned heroic as well. Here is Jess’ post. Neo]

When I was ten, I lived in America for a year – in the mid-West. I remember when we got to O’Hare airport looking at its size and marvelling; it seemed bigger than the town in which we lived in Wales. I recall going to St. Louis and seeing the Arch, and going up it and looking across the vastness of the city and asking my mother: ‘What is America for mummy?’ I can’t remember what she answered – she probably thought it was me trying to be clever; but it was a real question, and one I came to ask a few times whilst I was there.

I think I asked it for the reason many foreigners ask – there is something different about America.  I remember going with my mother to a Kiwanis Club and being struck by the way everyone put their fist on their breast as they swore the oath of allegiance to the flag. Indeed, I was so impressed that I memorised it so that the second time we went, I could do it too. I remember a nice man smiling but saying that I couldn’t do it because I was not an American citizen.  ‘How do you get to be one of those’, I asked? ‘Well, little lady, you could always marry an all-American boy’, was the answer.  I think I said something about ‘smelly boys’ and never wanting to get married because I wanted to be a nun. But a bit later I recall thinking that maybe the kind man had a point.  America, the very idea, seemed Romantic.

My father was fifty when I was born, and his tastes in movies became mine. When other teenage girls were swooning about Kevin Costner (really???), I was dismissive. John Wayne was my hero – and remains so. He summed up America for me. Strong, but never boastful about it. I remember crying when I saw ‘The Man who shot Liberty Valance’ – it was so unfair – it was Tom Donovan, not Ransom Stoddard who shot Liberty Valance, so why did the latter end up with the girl? Huh, I remember thinking, if I had been ‘the girl’ there was no way I’d have chosen Jimmy Stewart over John Wayne – what was she thinking?  But, as Tom Donovan might have said: “Whoa, take ‘er easy there, Pilgrim”.

The film’s message, which passed me by in my indignation, was about the passing of the old West, and the place of myth in the making of a nation. America is a nation built around myths and legends. That is not to say they are wrong, it is to say that those movies told a bigger story about the making of a great nation and what made it that. All nations need myths, and the point about the American one seemed to be encapsulated in my second favourite John Wayne film – ‘She wore a Yellow ribbon.’ Captain Nathan Brittles was the quintessential quiet American. A man who, having lost his family, was married to the army, and who did his duty, no matter what. My teenage heart went out to him, and I was very sniffy about the heroine going off with those ‘boys’ rather than a ‘real man’.

What John Ford caught in those films – especially the great trilogy which began with ‘Fort Apache’ and ended with ‘Rio Grande’ – was the very idea of America.  Call me a Romantic (no, do) – but that idea of America remains with me to this day. God Bless America – the land of the free.

I think Jess is very right, America is romantic, and yes, you can call me one too. But if we take the romance, and yes the legend and the saga out of our history, we are left with a strip of dirt, and just another group of people. That’s not my America, either. Here’s a piece of the legend. Neo

Happy Independence Day

The Climax

05 Wednesday Jun 2019

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 28 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,

Yesterday we celebrated the 75th anniversary of the fall of Rome, and at 0630 British Double Summer Time tomorrow the liberation of France started, also 75 years ago. Thus setting up a pincers attack on Nazi Germany. This was the climax of the European war, not the end of the beginning but the beginning of the end.

Like most of those of my age, I knew many of the veterans of those campaigns (the ones in the Pacific as well). Almost all of them are gone now, and we are much poorer for it.

If memory serves, Chalcedon’s father was at Dunkirk and served throughout the war. But C, like most of our generation, especially the guys, don’t talk about our emotions.

But Jess’s Grandfather in law, featured on our blogs briefly, when he left us back in 2012, and what she wrote, tells much of that generation.

Tom was not a Christian, although his wife (of 60 years) was; but he was a good man, although not given to what he used to call “sentiment”. The only time I ever saw him cry was when his wife died. She was the sweetest Christian soul I have ever known – a gentle and caring lady of the old school, who soothed away the ruffled tempers Tom’s attitude could leave in its wake. I never knew anyone who did not love her; I can’t even imagine how anyone could not.

Her death left him bereft. From that point his mental condition deteriorated, and for most of the last two years he had to be in a home because he had lost his faculties. I used to visit him every month, as the Captain was not here (as he isn’t now). He was a gruff old thing, and got gruffer as his condition worsened. But the last couple of times I saw him he just held my hand and smiled; and it was me who cried.

I cried for a man who had lost what he loved most. Like most of those of that generation, he and his wife seldom, if ever, demonstrated their love. They called each other “mother” and “father” and were just about the sweetest couple I ever saw in their selfless devotion to each other. I once said that and Tom replied: “Don’t be so daft girl – mother wouldn’t like it!”  ‘Mother’ said to me later: “I liked that Jessica, but don’t ever tell father I told you so.” That’s how they were. They don’t make them like that any more.

She died just short of their sixtieth wedding anniversary. With Tom goes my last living link to the World War II generation; my last contact with a man born in the reign of George V; my last link with my own father’s generation. It is the passing of an era – Tom – I loved you more than you’d ever let me say – and I will miss you always – God Bless and good night old soldier.

From: In Memoriam: Tom

She told me a bit more in Email, enough to intrigue me enough to do a bit of research. Here is what I learned.

Tom served in the 7th Armoured Brigade, the Desert Rats (the Green Rats) throughout World War 2, that means he was at all the battles of the British forces in North Africa until at least the relief of Tobruk. He may well have been one of those young soldiers, both British and German, who sang this song in Tobruk. [see below]

In early 1942 the brigade moved to that stepchild of everybody’s war effort, Burma just in time to have a hand in the defense of India from the Japanese.

In 1943 they returned to the middle east being based in Iraq and Egypt until in 1944 they joined the Canadian Corps in Italy, for the duration of the war.

From: The Last Crusader

Thus Tom, Like C’s father, likely spent more time in combat than the time America was in the war. Neither one was anything special, not even an officer, but it was they, and their American, Russian, Australian, New Zealander, Polish, French, Brazilian, and still other compatriates who rid the world of the most monstrous empires seen to this point.

And how far they had to go, in 1941, if English was not your native language, you were not a free man or woman  Our world is their legacy.

And so today and tomorrow as we, all over the world, honor those men and women, whom we call “The Greatest Generation” led by the very last veteran still leading, the Queen herself it’s worth reflecting on what we have contributed to our legacy.

And you know, Tom, in his turn with the German soldiery, probably sat in the bars in Tobruk singing this song.

On the night of June 4th, General Eisenhower said these words, “OK, let’s go”. The rest is history written by the soldiers.

 

The Faith of Superheroes (and Villains)

29 Wednesday Aug 2018

Posted by in Satire, Uncategorized

≈ 13 Comments

Tags

, , ,

I have no serious message whatsoever for today, except perhaps we need to lighten up for a minute or so. We’ve been really heavy here the last fortnight or so, as we should have been.

So sit back and enjoy, from Hans Fiene, the creator of Lutheran Satire, via The Federalist.

Batman’s an atheist now, you guys. Well, not exactly. After suffering a bit of an existential crisis, Bruce Wayne is questioning his faith in anything, not just the Triune God.

The Caped Crusader is more of a Doubting Descartes than a Determined Dawkins these days. Or, as Rich Cromwell put it, Batman is not so much an atheist as he is a slightly-more-lapsed-than-your-average Episcopalian.

So if the revelation about Batman’s lack of faith makes you fear that your children can no longer look up to a fornicating, spandex-wearing, deranged vigilante, don’t be afraid. Until Batman trades in the cowl for a fedora, he’s still the perfect role model for your seven-year-old.

Batman’s newfound lack of faith raises an interesting question: what do the rest of the folks in comic book land believe? Aside from pious Catholics like Nightcrawler and Daredevil (to whatever extent vigilantes can be pious Catholics), religious devotion is not a common feature of today’s superheroes, at least in their cinematic and small-screen forms.

So what do our various heroes and villains believe about God and salvation? What kind of monotheist is Captain America? What gods does the god of Thunder worship?

If you’re looking for an accurate list of comic book characters’ religious affiliations, check out this website, where we learn that Lois Lane is Catholic and Captain Underpants is Jewish. If, however, you’re looking for completely un-researched, slightly offensive, and wildly inaccurate speculation about the religious beliefs of various characters based on their biographies and personality quirks, I’m here to help.

Here are the religious affiliations of your favorite superheroes and super-villains.

Quite a bit more here.

Enjoy!

The Mission Statement

04 Wednesday Jul 2018

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on The Mission Statement

Tags

, , , ,

242 years ago a mission statement was issued. They didn’t use that fad term of course but, that’s exactly what it was. it was a mission statement for a revolt, indeed it was a mission statement for a Second English Civil War. It carries meanings for us all right down to the present day. Here it is.

In Congress, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

What did it all mean on that long ago 4th of July? Nothing, not a damned thing, it was just a revolt of part of the middle class in an unimportant colony.

But, through heartbreaking efforts and sacrifices they made their high-flown words good, against the greatest empire of the age, plus its hired mercenaries.

Thus was formed the United States of America and even more, the Free World itself.

Because from this mission statement came not only the American Revolution but, the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, and the very quiet revolution in Great Britain itself as the common man took on the roles and responsibility that had belonged to the knights and squires of the country.

Thus was lit the fire of the torch of liberty, never extinguished since.

I’m sure that my readers in the Anglosphere will note that our grievances all were about the traditional rights of English freemen. That is the reason that the revolt was cast against King George III, who was more German than English, rather than the Parliament.

In fact, if British readers read the center section of the Declaration, what Americans call “The Bill of Particulars”, they will find many of the same offenses against liberty that drove Brexit as well.

Nor is it to say that even in that day that the colonists were bereft of friends in England, William Pitt the Elder, and Adam Smith (whose Wealth of Nations was published that year also) come to mind.

Thus was fired the torch of Liberty that has lighted the path for us, the descendants of Rebels, and Rebels still, from that day to this, nor will we willingly see it change in the future, for if the torch is extinguished there will only be the darkness of tyranny.

I have not the words to describe my love of America but, luckily others do. Here is an excerpt from Cassandra of  Villainous Company,  who phrases it better than I could dream of doing.

We were the First. We are the guardians of the flame. Not perfect beings, but in all the world the only ones, it seems, still naive enough, still brave enough, still daring enough to put our money where our mouths are. We are the only ones who are still willing to defend the dream with our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor.

Not all the time. Not in every single instance, because that is impossible. And honest liberals will admit that: in a universe with limited resources, choices must be made. But where we can, where it aligns with our interests and with the interests of the rest of the world: yes.

Our own Revolution was not without blemish. Innocent men were tarred and feathered. Families torn asunder. People bled, and suffered and starved. There was even [shudder] terrorism. But it lit a flame that has burned brightly for over 200 years. There are signs that this is happening in the MiddleEast: Arabs are looking at election day in Iraq and Afghanistan and demanding democratic reforms in Egypt and Lebanon and Kuwait. The fire in men’s (and women’s) hearts is spreading.

We would like certainty. We would like painless progress. We would like closure. We will not get any of those things.

On July 4th we must ask ourselves, what do we believe? Our military – brand new immigrants who enlist before the ink is dry on their visas – believe in those words so strongly that they will lay down their lives to spread the fire of democracy. They also believe (as I do) that their purpose is to serve American foreign policy aims, no matter how abstract and long-term they may seem. No matter how difficult to explain to the American people. No matter how frustrating in the short term.

What kind of world will we bequeath to our grandchildren? It may be that long before we know. But our actions today will have an incalculable effect on that far-off tomorrow. And if our policy is not firmly grounded in the spread of those long-ago words:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…

…then I wonder if we shall not be the first Americans who fail to pass the blessings of liberty on to the next generation?

“The only thing necessary for evil to triumph. is for good men to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke.

Happy Birthday, America. May you always be great. May you remain a nation of thinkers, of dreamers, of believers, of doers; striving always towards our ideals without despising the imperfect means we use to achieve them.

But most importantly, may you never give in to cynicism and despair. In life as in sports, ninety nine percent of success lies in simply showing up.

Do read her entire article here. It may well be my favorite blog post of all time.

Hey listen, the band is playing our song, this was our first National Anthem during the War of Independence.

The world knows that where that flag flies, there is liberty.

Happy Birthday, America,

Press on, Continue the mission!

Men in and of the Church

14 Saturday Apr 2018

Posted by in Blogging, Faith, Uncategorized

≈ 31 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,

This follows on from yesterday’s points on men in the church.

The Rev Karl Hess noticed something from Mundabor’s blog (well, we are in the same business, after all)

[…]Comment Sissy showed up (nickname: “anonymous”; you never know which “anonymous” is “anonymous”) and said the critics of the Novus Ordo were uncharitable, un-this, and un-that. There had been no vitriolic comments, merely a very mild sarcasm.

A good soul, nickname “Templar” (nice one, by the way) intervened with the following words:

I grew up in New York, the Priests from my parish lived exactly 7 doors down from me and our interaction with them was daily and very personal. They were mostly Irish and Italian, most cussed like sailors (refraining only from taking the Lord’s name), used acerbic wit to cut down many a sinner, and wouldn’t back down from a fight if it came to it.

Good Bye good men.

Now we have anonymous posters who wring their hands over bruised feelings, and perceived slights. What you sow is what you reap. We have raised up milquetoast Catholics. Where is the Church Militant? Where are the Warriors? Islam is burying the world through birth rate and butchery, and us Catholics are afraid of some rough language.

The poster hits the bull’s eye in a very pithy way.

We live in times of such unmanliness that by every exchange of opinion that reaches the level of more than mild disapprobation someone – the Comment Sissy; they are everywhere – feels the need to intervene and say how “disparaging” and insensitive other people are.

In former times, such people would have been invited to go play with their dolls; nowadays, the Comment Sissy is socially accepted, and thinks he has firmly taken the moral high ground; it is like a pervert game of political correctness, in which the first one crying “disparaging” has won.

Rev Hess said it reminded him of another Catholic priest about 500 years ago.

I  have  indeed  inveighed  sharply  against  impious  doctrines,  and  I  have  not  been  slack  to  censure  my  adversaries  on  account,  not  of  their  bad  morals,  but  of  their  impiety.  And  for  this  I  am  so  far  from  being  sorry,  that  I  have  brought  my  mind  to  despise  the  judgments  of  men,  and  to  persevere  in  this  vehement  zeal,  according  to  the  example  of  Christ,  who,  in  his  zeal,  calls  his  adversaries  a  generation  of  vipers, blind,  hypocrites,  and  children  of  the  devil.  Paul  too  charges  the  sorcerer  with  being  a  child  of  the  devil,  full  of  all  subtlety  and  all  malice;  and  defames  certain  persons  as  evil  workers,  dogs,  and  deceivers.  In  the  opinion  of  those  delicate-­‐eared  persons,  nothing  could  be  more  bitter  or  intemperate  than  Paul’s language.  What  can  be  more  bitter  than  the  words  of  the  prophets?  The  ears  of  our  generation  have been  made  so  delicate  by  the  senseless  multitude  of  flatterers,  that,  so  soon  as  we  perceive  that  anything  of  ours  is  not  approved  of,  we  cry  out  that  we  are  being  bitterly  assailed;  and  when  we  can  repel  the  truth  by  no  other  pretence,  we  escape  by  attributing  bitterness,  impatience,  intemperance,  to  our  adversaries.  What  would  be  the  use  of  salt,  if  it  were  not  pungent?  or  of  the  edge  of  the  sword,  if  it  did  not  slay?  Accursed  is  the  man,  who  does  the  work  of  the  Lord  deceitfully.

From The freedom of a Christian (PDF)

I think we can all sympathize, we’ve all met the commenters, that have no facts, but are so very easily offended, and so make personal attacks. Indeed, we’ve had a few here, over the years, they rarely last long, though.

Proving God Exists

30 Monday Jan 2017

Posted by in Education, Faith, Uncategorized

≈ 16 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

after Unknown artist, line engraving, late 16th century

St Anselm

St. Anselm of Canterbury, in his Proslogion, made the first ontological argument, arguing as Wikipedia tells us: 

“that than which nothing greater can be conceived”, and argued that this being must exist in the mind; even in the mind of the person who denies the existence of God. He suggested that, if the greatest possible being exists in the mind, it must also exist in reality. If it only exists in the mind, then an even greater being must be possible — one which exists both in the mind and in reality. Therefore, this greatest possible being must exist in reality.

That makes quite a lot of logical sense, at least to me. But it’s been argued down the ages, right until the present day.

kurt_godelMathematician and logician Kurt Gödel when he died in 1978, left behind a series of calculations that purport to prove St. Amselm’s thesis. These, in fact:

“Ax. 1. {P(φ)∧◻∀x[φ(x)→ψ(x)]} →P(ψ)Ax. 2.P(¬φ)↔¬P(φ)Th. 1.P(φ)→◊∃x[φ(x)]Df. 1.G(x)⟺∀φ[P(φ)→φ(x)]Ax. 3.P(G)Th. 2.◊∃xG(x)Df. 2.φ ess x⟺φ(x)∧∀ψ{ψ(x)→◻∀y[φ(y)→ψ(y)]}Ax. 4.P(φ)→◻P(φ)Th. 3.G(x)→G ess xDf. 3.E(x)⟺∀φ[φ ess x→◻∃yφ(y)]Ax. 5.P(E)Th. 4.◻∃xG(x)”.

Don’t look at me like that, nobody promised there wouldn’t be math, and if I had a thirty-foot ladder, well, maybe I could find the bottom of the pool. In any case, some explanatory notes:

Definition 1: x is God-like if and only if x has as essential properties those and only those properties which are positive

Definition 2: A is an essence of x if and only if for every property B, x has B necessarily if and only if A entails B

Definition 3: x necessarily exists if and only if every essence of x is necessarily exemplified

Axiom 1: If a property is positive, then its negation is not positive

Axiom 2: Any property entailed by—i.e., strictly implied by—a positive property is positive

Axiom 3: The property of being God-like is positive

Axiom 4: If a property is positive, then it is necessarily positive

Axiom 5: Necessary existence is positive

Axiom 6: For any property P, if P is positive, then being necessarily P is positive

Theorem 1: If a property is positive, then it is consistent, i.e., possibly exemplified

Corollary 1: The property of being God-like is consistent

Theorem 2: If something is God-like, then the property of being God-like is an essence of that thing

Theorem 3: Necessarily, the property of being God-like is exemplified

My course in introductory logic, and my math courses, both long ago, say that those explanations each and together make sense. But this isn’t new, after all, it came out in 1978.

What is new, is that “Christoph Benzmüller of Berlin’s Free University, who ran the calculations along with Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo of the Technical University in Vienna, told Spiegel Online: “It’s totally amazing that from this argument led by Gödel, all this stuff can be proven automatically in a few seconds or even less on a standard notebook.”

“I didn’t know it would create such a huge public interest but [Gödel’s ontological proof] was definitely a better example than something inaccessible in mathematics or artificial intelligence…

They do say that, “The point of the researchers’ argument was that they were not directly trying to prove the existence of God, but rather to showcase the power of computers.”

Well, I guess they did both. Still, it’s far enough over my head that I think I’ll take their word for it, and continue to take God on faith, myself. It is interesting, though.

Gene Veith at Cranach, where I found the story, also notes that Gödel was baptized Lutheran, and remained a Bible reading Christian although he was not a member of any church.

Accepting democracy?

10 Thursday Nov 2016

Posted by in Lutheranism, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ 25 Comments

Tags

,

And so it begins. Does anyone really listen to what ‘celebrities’ have to say about politics? If so, I hope someone has hired a jumbo jet to take those anguished ‘celebs’ away from the agony of having to live under President Trump. Meanwhile the special snowflakes have taken to the streets to express the depths of their anguish; counselling services are probably fully-booked for months to come. Do American civics classes explain how the US system of government works? It isn’t fearfully complicated – people vote, the electoral college meets and then the President gets elected.  If 46% of the electorate decide not to vote that’s their business – you can’t infer anything from it, and certainly not that the President-elect is not legitimately elected. Opinion polls have no constitutional status, and the fact that they all called this wrong suggests that they take up another line of work – entrail reading, perhaps?

The language used by the self-selecting liberal elite about Trump and his supporters is as bad as anything Trump has said – so if they think they are occupying some sort of moral high ground they might take a reality check. Trump will be the next President. If he’s as big an idiot as they say, tough, everyone will suffer; if he’s as good as he says he is, everyone will benefit. That’s how this democracy thing works. There isn’t some sort of limited liability here; we are all in it together. So, if you think the media are rubbish, don’t buy it – it will change or die. If you don’t like your politicians, get involved and try to change things; that’s how this democracy thing works. If your total involvement is you meant to vote but didn’t get round to it – tough. Rule of the people by the people demands the people get involved. Those who do get to influence the result. But they still have to run that past the vast majority who don’t really follow politics. Now you can, as the Clintonistas are doing, express your contempt for the great uneducated unwashed, but don’t be too shocked if they follow your example. Rainbow coalitions of minorities are fine, but if the majority get the idea that identity politics is where it is at, don’t be too shocked if they play that card back – and as there are more of them, they may just win. The take away here is that identity/grievance politics are divisive and corrosive and risk undermining democracy.

Here in the UK and there in the US there are a lot of liberals who appear to be giving the impression that democracy is acceptable only when it delivers what they want. Those for whom it has not been delivering have spoken, and there are more of them bothering to vote. The choice before our political classes is clear. One hopes, for all our sake they get the message. 

The Rise of a New Culture of Effete Weaklings

06 Sunday Nov 2016

Posted by in Faith, Uncategorized

≈ 62 Comments

Tags

, ,

is-it-becoming-extinct

We have touched on the following subjects here at AATW concerning ‘Academic Freedom’, ‘Freedom of Speech’, ’Accepting the Sin right along with the Sinner’, ‘Reclassifying and Normalizing Sins’ not to mention ‘Xenophobia’ – especially popular amongst those who have lost their ‘grit’ to speak the truth whilst it is ‘out of season’ in the Modern Brave New World. NOTE: which is a misnomer, since for all intents and purposes, they know not the meaning of bravery for they are the weakest generation this world has seen to date: for from where I sit, we have a new culture that consists of craven little cowards who throw tantrums if they feel that their precious feelings have been damaged by a word, a glance or an innuendo – college students that require ‘safe zones’ and copious amounts of tranquilizing drugs to keep them from having emotional breakdowns.

Welcome to a culture led by the effete, bolstered up with a pseudo-courage of like minded weasels who have implemented mountains of legislation and laws to give them immunity from having to endure criticism, scorn and outright disgust. This is the post-Christian civilization that is emerging from the ashes of the virile, manly cultures that our fathers hewed in strength and courage and was protected with no less than their life’s blood. Courage, valor, honor, temperance, fortitude, prudence and character have been jettisoned only to be replaced by whining, shrieking, cowering, sniveling little robots who hide beneath the cover of ‘hate speech’ laws, a carte blanche [legally enforced] acceptance of every perversion and destructive force to both the family and to the general character of any normal society which might strive, survive or even thrive in this ‘not-so-perfect’ world.

This overly protected society has never been required to make it on its own, solve its own problems, or deal with difficulties; their parents, schools and governments were there to make sure they never grew up and lost their innocence; reminiscent of the story regarding the raising of Sidhartha who was kept far away from anything that was sad or the least bit troubling. At least least with Sidhartha, reality finally encroached on his utopia and was forced to confront it.  I have no indication that the same is about to happen to those who have bought into this new culture of ours; based on wants, needs and desires and never disturbed by truth, faith or reality. It is a utopia in their own minds . . . but only so long as the world won’t say mean and negative things to disturb their sensitive souls. Alas, we have created a world of emotional cripples who are the weakest of the weak and yet have been encouraged to think of themselves as the best of the best, the enlightened, the smartest, the more compassionate and most merciful generation on the planet. We have coddled them with diversity training, and to respect what is not respectable [they know not the meaning of the word yet]. They grew up receiving participation trophies and taught to believe in their own self-esteem.

“I can accomplish anything [not by working for it but by demanding it]. I can be whatever I want [because I deserve it and it is my right and an entitlement due to my sheer existence]. I can even be man if I am a woman or a woman if I am a man. Who is to tell me who or what I am? Only I can be the source of that truth.” The truth is never objective and to butt up against such truths is painful to them . . . and thus rejected and discounted as immoral and unloving lies that are being laid upon them as a ‘yoke’ too heavy to bare.

Well, this generation or their mentors are now of the age to be our ‘fearless’ leaders and they will pander for votes and describe a world of unicorns and fairies, but the reality is far from the truth. The world they paint is an hallucination drawn by the enemies of Christ and His Cross [let them not even contemplate the pains of the cross] and the hell that they create on this earth is not one that I personally will participate in: robot workers, lovers and soldiers, marriage-less, childless, sexless. A world where people are nothing more than domesticated animals in a petting zoo with all their needs taken care of and where the biggest decisions they will ever make is what to wear or what new gadget they will play with next. God help us . . . we have created a monster far more frightening than the original Frankenstein.

Christianity and the New Spirit of Capitalism

20 Thursday Oct 2016

Posted by in Church/State, Faith, Uncategorized

≈ 24 Comments

Tags

, , ,

Over the course of the last posts, here, and here, and his link on Catholic social teaching, here, Chalcedon has done much to limn the problems many of us have reconciling our present economy to our Christian beliefs.

Most here will know that I have quite deep libertarian political tendencies, but I too, recognize those problems. It seems to me that what we see today as capitalism, is not what I grew up with, it has become something else, the unchanging focus on the quarterly bottom line highlights the problem. The world I grew up in honored, sometimes too much, the loyal employee, who stayed with the same company, doing his best to help the company, which in turn was loyal to him. Today, that entire ethos is gone, and work has both become all encompassing and completely individualized. But we, especially as Christians know that we are far better as individuals in a community, whether that community is a corporation, the military, or indeed the church.

So how did we get here, and where do we go from here, if anywhere. Most of you know how my thinking goes generally, but I’m no expert, I take in data, analyze it in view of my experience, and draw conclusions. As they say, your mileage may differ, in fact, it probably will.

But recently I ran across something that strikes me as relevant. Professor Kathryn Tanner, the Marquand Professor of Systematic Theology at Yale Divinity School. gave a series of Gifford Lectures at the University of Edinburgh. I think there are five of them, I’ve only watched the first so far, but I think she has a quite large contribution to make to the conversation.

Here is her introductory lecture.

I do agree with much of what she say about economics, I’m still evaluating, though. What do you think?