The Bible of Communism

On February 21, 1848, The Communist Manifesto was published by the Communist League in London. That evil document – an unabashed scheme for world domination – is now 172 years old and not only continues to shape our world, but expresses the principles of those who are dragging humanity into the depths of chaos, agony, and destruction. This article is written for those who have never read the Manifesto, do not understand why it is applicable today, or who wish to gain insight into its true origins at the hands of a powerful secret society.

communism453

In his booklet To Communism . . . Via Majority Vote, Ben Moreell wrote of the Manifesto as the “bible” of communism. He said:

If a person intends to fight something, he should know his enemy in order to plan his strategy. Otherwise, he may do more harm than good . . . “THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO”, published in 1848, is the “bible” of the communist faith.”

Mr. Moreell noted how “disturbed” he was when he first read The Communist Manifesto. He repeated its stated plan for the conquest of the world, which we will highlight later, and then remarked:

If this century-old strategy of Marx – what today we call “creeping socialism” – sounds familiar to you in the light of current events in America, you will understand why I am disturbed. You see, I had believed that communism would come by violence. Now I discovered that the goal was to be achieved not by bullets, but by ballots; not by illegal, but by legal means; not by a few evil persons, but by vote of the majority.

This throws a new light on the problem. It appears that in our struggle against communism, we Americans may well be choosing the wrong battlefield, at the wrong time, and against the wrong enemy. It may be that while we are fighting communist armies thousands of miles away, communism itself is marching steadily forward under the stimulus of easy triumphs here at home” (Ben Moreell, To Communism . . . Via Majority Vote, 2, 6).

It is a verifiable certainty that the communist virus has infected America, just as it has infected every nation on earth. The United States has adopted, to greater or lesser degree, each of the Ten Planks of The Communist Manifesto. Though the communist revolution is being waged globally, the most important battlefields we can fight on are in our own nation, communities, and homes. While communism should be opposed with power, it is much more important to oppose it with principles. At its core, this is a spiritual fight – a war between two irrevocably opposite worldviews.

communism735

In the wake of 9/11 false flag attacks, a modern Marxist group calling itself the Communist League came into being. In 2003, they wrote an outlandish pamphlet titled What is Communism? In it, they gave us an interesting detail about the coming forth of The Communist Manifesto:

When Marx and Engels began the process of transforming the utopian League of the Just into the Communist League, the document they used for this work had the awful working title of Draft of a Communist Confession of Faith. This document would itself go through a thorough revision and be circulated under the title, Principles of Communism, and would serve as the basis for the Communist Manifesto.”

Marx obviously considered his Manifesto a “communist confession of faith.” It was a declaration of belief and principle. Communism, to Marx, was akin to a religion. Indeed, it is Satanism personified – a wholesale rebellion against God and natural law. Mr. Moreell was correct, then, to call the Manifesto the “bible” of communism. The Communist Manifesto gives us a glimpse into the dark heart of this evil movement.

The Ten Planks of the Manifesto is its most famous feature. Mr. Moreell called them “the battle plan of communism” (Moreell, 4). We will begin our analysis of the stated communist plan there. Marx prefaced his ten points by stating that “the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of democracy.” Communists always promote “democracy” and “democratic” movements. For instance, in the March 1918 edition of the New York-based Marxist magazine The Liberator, we find this line on page three:

With the Russian people in the lead, the world is entering upon the experiment of industrial and real democracy.”

To communists, Soviet-style Bolshevism is “real democracy.” Marxists always seek to first establish democracy – that is, majoritarian mob rule – in a country they seek to conquer because it is easy to inflame passions, cause divisions, pit factions against one another, and then come to power while eliminating enemies under cover of the chaos. Communists love to use this “divide and conquer” technique. And it undoubtedly works best in a democratic society.

communism471

Marx further wrote that after democracy is established:

The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State. . . .

Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production.

These measures will, of course, be different in different countries.

Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.”

Before we list the Ten Planks that will “be pretty generally applicable” in every industrialized nation, another quick note. The communists intend the democratic mob to be mobilized to vote away their own rights and centralize all political power “in the hands of the State.” Despite the communists’ rhetoric about the people holding power, Marx is clear that it is the state that will wield all power.

I err when I say communists refer to “the people” as holding power. They actually allege that only “the workers” have a claim on power (and the workers are of course represented by the dictatorial state), and that the propertied class is an inherent enemy that needs to be divested of their power, property, and wealth. Page six of the same issue of The Liberator just quoted contains this brazen paragraph:

It is never “the people” who will accomplish this [turn to communism] – Lenine [sic] has been warned against the concept of “the people” in his Bible of Karl Marx from the beginning. It is the working-class who will accomplish it, and they will accomplish it, if they can, by establishing a dictatorship, overt and uncompromising. The truth is that only after a general transfer of land and factories to the workers is accomplished, so that substantially all the people have become workers, and the super-political influence of a capitalist class is removed, can an appeal to the people really be an appeal to the people. Only then does formal justice and democracy of a popular vote become materially just and democratic. And this delving under the forms of law and politics to the economic materials of right and liberty, is the essence of socialist thinking. If the American moralistic democrat cannot grasp this, he will do well to suspend his judgment and watch it – for it will continue to the end with little bother whether he cries “Dictator! Anarchy! Traitor to the people!” or not.”

Note the threatening arrogance. The communists plan to set up a “dictatorship” over America whether we like it or not. They’ll do so under the guise of establishing “democracy” and “justice” – particularly for the “workers” and less fortunate. But in reality, there will be no justice or representation for the American People under a Marxist system. Our property will be confiscated or abolished and we’ll all be forced into the thralldom of a high-tech feudal system.

Marx fully acknowledged that this transfer of power from the people to the state will require the people’s agents in government to make “despotic inroads on the rights of property.” Inasmuch as there is no Liberty without the right to own and manage property, Marx was subtly calling for the ruthless destruction of the Liberty of those he claimed to want to liberate. And he wanted to accomplish this centralization of power in the hands of the state by means of class warfare.

The communists have always attempted to get the majority so aggravated and angry about their alleged “oppression” and “victimization” at the hands of the “bourgeoisie” that the people will throw their support behind radical socialistic laws designed to transfer wealth and power to the state. Today we heard Democrats, Progressives, and socialists condemning the “1%” and saying things like “tax the rich” and “make the rich pay their fair share.” These sentiments are straight out of The Communist Manifesto. If we follow this course through to its conclusion, we will reap the entire “revolutionizing” of our society and an all-powerful state dominating every aspect of our lives.

communism20

In order to centralize all things “in the hands of the state” and turn a society communist, Marx proposed the following:

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.”

communism827

This, dear reader, is how socialists and communists everywhere attempt to steal power away from the people and lodge it in the hands of the state – the state controlled, of course, by them. You perhaps noticed that several of the Ten Planks are already in place in the United States. If so, I commend you. However, if you are really perceptive, you noted that all ten of Marx’s suggestions have been enacted in our nation.

Yes, all Ten Planks of The Communist Manifesto have been enacted, to one extent or another, in the United States of America! As Ezra Taft Benson once stated, “the Fabian Socialists are as busy as bees rolling out the red carpet which leads inevitably to Communism” (Ezra Taft Benson, “A Race Against Time,” BYU address, December 10, 1963). Though socialists are the ones enacting Marxist principles and policies while the communists cheer-lead from the sidelines, the destination is communist “utopia.”

Let’s give a quick rundown on each of the ten points listed and how they’ve been implemented in our Republic.

1. Abolition of property.

Naturally, all property hasn’t been abolished . . . yet. However, your property (eg. your home, land, car, salary) is heavily taxed, regulated, and micromanaged by local, state, and federal governments. The federal government has also taken control over massive swaths of land all over the country – particularly in the West. 79.6% of Nevada’s land, 63.1% of Utah’s land, and 61.6% of Idaho’s land, to name only three, is owned and controlled by the federal government. Millions of acres of land and resources are tied up in national parks and UNESCO world heritage sites. The government steals land for “public purposes” under eminent domain rules never envisioned by the Founding Fathers and inaugurated by the odious 14th Amendment. And, finally, in some situations the federal government has outright confiscated Americans’ property. For instance, federal agencies, such as the BLM, have confiscated millions of acres of private land from ranchers and farmers while FDR’s administration notoriously confiscated America’s gold in 1933.

2. A progressive income tax.

In some translations, Marx called for a “graduated” income tax – that is, an unequal tax determined by one’s level of income. It is class antagonism at its finest. The 16th Amendment, rammed down our nation’s throat in 1913, destroys the Constitution’s requirement that all taxes be apportioned equally. Unequal taxes are little more than wealth redistribution. Taxing the “rich” more so that they’ll pay their “fair” share is actually the opposite of fairness and equity. Equal taxation is fair; graduated taxation is a Marxist wealth redistribution scheme.

3. Abolition of inheritance rights.

This Marxist assault on private wealth and personal property takes the form of estate, inheritance, and death taxes. In the United States, you are no longer free to hand down your estate and inheritance to your children, or whomever, without the government getting involved and taxing that wealth. What modern Marxists do is tax (i.e. steal) the property of deceased individuals – property that has already been taxed. This largely puts the fruit of your labor at the mercy of government bureaucrats and deprives your family of their just inheritance.

communism778

4. Confiscation of rebel and emigrant property.

The federal government has been busy taxing, and in some cases confiscating, the wealth of those who choose to emigrate out of the country. This is often called the Exit Tax. It is little more than highway robbery. Also, the government’s mafia arm, the IRS, routinely uses its power to bully dissidents and those whose politics diverge from the Marxist Establishment’s.

5. Establish a national bank and state monopoly over credit.

Establishing a national bank is considered by many to be the linchpin of the communist battle plan. Lenin purportedly said that setting up a national bank is 90% of communizing a country. Whether or not he said it, it has an element of truth. In 1913, a Marxist-style central bank was foisted upon the Republic in a sham process that you can read about in Antony C. Sutton’s book The Federal Reserve Conspiracy and G. Edward Griffin’s tome The Creature from Jekyll Island. The Federal Reserve is a privately-owned cartel of banks that is unaccountable to our government, yet controls inflation and interest rates, and prints or restricts currency at will, causing economic recessions and depressions. The Federal Reserve system is indeed a monopoly over the American economy. No one knows precisely who owns shares in this monstrosity, but it is certain that a small clique of elitist foreigners and U.S. citizens wield power over our economy via the Federal Reserve.

6. Centralization of communication and transportation.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was set up by FDR’s Marxist administration and has engaged in restricting free speech ever since in direct violation of the 1st Amendment. The federal government has also tried to centralize the means of transportation by establishing government-run companies like Amtrak. And various public figures are also now calling for “free” public transport. Of course, nothing government gives is “free” and “free” public transport would require an increase in taxes and/or more government intervention in our right of mobility.

7. Government takeover of factories and land.

Federal intervention in agriculture has grown massively over the years. In fact, the first government agency infiltrated by communist spies was the Department of Agriculture. The Soviet Union forcibly set up collectivized farms and deliberately instituted policies that led to mass famine. Thankfully we have not traveled that far down the path to Marxist utopia, but the government’s hand is still in places it should not be. And, of course, American factories and industry have been massively hampered by regulations dictated by interventionist agencies like OSHA and the EPA.

8. Everyone must work.

While work is of course a good thing, and the virtues of personal industry are to be commended and encouraged, this Marxist proposal would force people to work and would mobilize them under federal auspices. FDR’s Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) is one example of this plan in action. Additionally, many signature pieces of socialist legislation – such as the dastardly Equal Rights Amendment – have been aimed at getting women out of the home and into the workforce like they are in Russia. The federal government’s Civilian Inmate Labor Program is also a concerning glimpse into our Marxist future if we don’t change course immediately.

9. Abolish rural communities and move everyone to cities.

This plank has Agenda 21 or Agenda 2030 written all over it. A major part of the U.N. 2030 program is to move people from rural areas into an urban environment where they can be more easily controlled. Corporate farming and various federal zoning acts are also nudging us in the direction Marx envisioned.

communism813

10. Free education in government schools.

Finally, the communists crave control over education. They offer “free” education. Of course, with “free” anything comes government intervention. Marx’s idea was to establish a government public school system that would undo centuries of godly, grounded, good education. Instead, children would be ushered into Darwinistic, socialistic, unChristian thinking that would translate into support for the communist world revolution. Today, the federal government blackmails schools into submission through the Department of Education and forces egregious programs like No Child Left Behind and Common Core on America’s youth.

In my opinion, this is the most important of the Ten Planks because of the true adage that what is taught in the schools one generation becomes the policy of the next. America is undergoing a gut-wrenching social transformation. We are on the verge of embracing full cultural Marxism. While the conspirators use media, Hollywood, and other means to brainwash people, public schools are driving the indoctrination process. LGBT propaganda in particular has infested our schools and drag queens, homosexuals, and mentally ill transgenders have full access to our children. It is altogether possible that public schools have become the greatest threat to our survival as a society because they have been taken over by the Reds and are little more than communist training centers. I urge parents who care about their children’s education and upbringing to homeschool wherever circumstances allow.

As you can see, the Marxists have been working overtime to gut our Constitution and transform our government and society into a socialist state. Following Marx’s economic interpretation of history, the communists in our midst have focused on plundering American wealth, restricting our stewardship over our own property, and centralizing power over our pocketbooks in the hands of the state. At least a portion of all Ten Planks of The Communist Manifesto have been implemented in our Republic, causing us to falter as a People.

Marx’s Manifesto not only offers a ten-point blueprint for victory, but lists other goals that will assist the communists in their ascent. The Manifesto rants against the family unit in these words:

Abolition of the family! Even the most radical flare up at this infamous proposal of the Communists.

On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution.

The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital.

Do you charge us with wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents? To this crime we plead guilty.

But, you say, we destroy the most hallowed of relations, when we replace home education by social.

And your education! Is not that also social, and determined by the social conditions under which you educate, by the intervention direct or indirect, of society, by means of schools, &c.? The Communists have not invented the intervention of society in education; they do but seek to alter the character of that intervention, and to rescue education from the influence of the ruling class.

The bourgeois clap-trap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parents and child, becomes all the more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry, all the family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labour.”

communism853

The communists believe that the traditional, patriarchal, Christian family unit is inherently exploitative. They think that the sacred relationship between children and parents is “disgusting.” They openly seek to take children from their homes and indoctrinate them in public schools with a “social” education that will turn them into good little proletarians.

What’s more, Marxists want to abolish the family! The family unit is the most important institution in society. As goes the family, goes the nation. The communists understand that no matter how strong their grip on public schools or communication systems is, they will never win over the hearts and minds of people who are educated at home in the principles of truth, Liberty, and righteousness. As always, their solution is to use the strong arm of government to pry children from their parents’ loving embrace and raise them as de facto wards of the state.

I now note the Marxist assault on faith, the other key pillar of civilization. We all know that communism is openly hostile to religion (and Christianity specifically). In his 1847 Draft of a Communist Confession of Faith mentioned earlier, which served as a forerunner to the Manifesto, Marx wrote:

All religions which have existed hitherto were expressions of historical stages of development of individual peoples or groups of peoples. But communism is that stage of historical development which makes all existing religions superfluous and supersedes them.”

It should be noted that Karl Marx was a Satan-worshiping Jew introduced to the communist faith by the influential “communist rabbi” Moses Hess. I don’t say this in a polemical way, but as a statement of fact. The Reverend Richard Wurmbrand makes a compelling case for Marx’s Satanism in his fantastic little book Marx & Satan. Most other early communist leaders were also Jews and many, such as Lenin, are known to have attended pagan and occult rituals. The Soviet Union established museums of atheism (often inside of closed down Christian churches as a form of mockery). In at least the Odessa museum of atheism, a statue of Baphomet was erected. Eerily, The Satanic Temple is busy erecting Baphomet statues in the United States today.

Communist antagonism to religion is infamous. The Communist Manifesto brushed off religious objections to its proposals as not deserving of serious examination.” But Marx’s contempt bled threw nonetheless. In one place, he alleged: “Nothing is easier than to give Christian asceticism a Socialist tinge . . . Christian Socialism is but the holy water with which the priest consecrates the heart-burnings of the aristocrat.” Marx said that Christianity was a fad whose time to give way to a new and better system has come.

If it wasn’t obvious already, the communists admit that their goal is to seize political power and establish a dictatorship over the earth. Marx wrote:

The immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat.”

Again, the Marxists want to seize power by abolishing private property. In my article “Private Property Essential to Liberty,” I discussed the inseparable connection of Liberty and property at length. I sum up my conclusions by quoting John Adams who stated: “Property must be secured, or liberty cannot exist” (John Adams, “Discourses on Davila,” Chapter XIII). Since stewardship over one’s property is the sum of individual Liberty, the communists seek to destroy Liberty. Marx admitted:

[T]he theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.”

communism482

A recent poll demonstrates how successful communist propagandizing has been in America. The poll found that a whopping 70% of millennials would consider voting for a socialist candidate. 36% of those same millennials openly supported communism. I quote from a MarketWatch article discussing the disturbing development:

Marion Smith, executive director of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, says he’s troubled by the findings of the poll.

““The historical amnesia about the dangers of communism and socialism is on full display in this year’s report,” Smith said in a statement on Monday. “When we don’t educate our youngest generations about the historical truth of 100 million victims murdered at the hands of communist regimes over the past century, we shouldn’t be surprised at their willingness to embrace Marxist ideas.”

Other nuggets from the report include that 22% of millennials believe “society would be better if all private property was abolished,” and that 45% of Generation Z members and millennials believe that “all higher education should be free.””

Yes, the communists have met with wild success in waging their world revolution. They’re capturing the minds of the youth and raising a generation apparently willing to embrace the siren song of socialism. If people knew the true origins of the Communist League, however, perhaps they would be less likely to favor its proposals.

In the preface to the 1888 English edition of the Manifesto, Marx’s cohort and co-author Frederick Engels wrote that the Communist League which hired them and published the document was a “secret society.” Most people scarcely know about the Communist League let alone its progenitors. To see communism in its proper context, however, we must know its roots.

What if I told you that the Communist League was an Illuminati splinter organization and that communism is nothing but Illuminism with a new name? The Order of Illuminati was founded by the Jewish occultist Adam Weishaupt in Bavaria on May 1, 1776. May 1, not coincidentally, is the communists’ signature holiday and a major date on the pagan calendar. In 1782, the Illuminati joined forces with Jewish radicals and certain groups of Freemasons at the Masonic Congress of Wilhelmsbad.

communism392

When Weishaupt’s Order was discovered a little after the Wilhelmsbad Congress, the Bavarian authorities attempted to squash it. By that point, however, Illuminati cells had been established in numerous countries from France to England to the United States. One of the major Illuminati front groups is known to history as the Jacobins. The Jacobins, of course, fomented the bloody French Revolution and introduced the guillotine to the world during its Reign of Terror. The French Revolution was merely a test run for the later putsch in Russia in 1917.

Other Illuminati offshoots included the German Union, the Tugenbund, and the League of Virtue. The League of Outlaws also popped up in France. In 1836, the League of Outlaws split in two. The more radical faction moved to England and called itself the League of the Just. It was this same League that hired Marx and Engels to write a confession of the group’s faith and renamed itself the Communist League.

The Communist League went through numerous iterations after its abortive attempt to launch continent-wide revolution in 1848. Finally, it came to be called the Social Democratic Workers’ Party. One faction within this Party was led by Lenin and was deemed the Bolsheviks. It was the Bolsheviks who, with Western socialist financial backing, launched the coup against the Russian government in 1917. When they established the Soviet Union, they reverted back to the name “communist.” The Soviet communists, however, were lineal descendants of the Order of Illuminati. A British documentary “Angels and Demons Revealed” did an analysis of secret GRU documents obtained after the fake “fall” of the Soviet Union wherein the Illuminati seal – the pyramid and all-seeing eye – was found hidden inside an unassuming period, suggesting that the communists have known all along who they are and what they represent.

Today, communist parties exist throughout the world, including in our own country. Bernie Sanders, and avowed socialist, is currently leading the Democratic Party candidate pack. Red China is formally a communist state. Radical communists rule everywhere from South Africa to Venezuela to Russia to North Korea to France. And the Fabian Socialists which wield so much power in the West are not a divergent groups, but are in fact ideological adherents of Marx. Socialism is just communism with a smiley face. Or, as the Fabian symbol depicts, it is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

communism839

I want younger people to understand that when they support socialism/communism, they are supporting the schemes of the Illuminati. Socialism/communism is not a utopian ideology that preaches “equality” or that promises “free” things, but a plot for world domination concocted by a Satanic secret society that has launched the bloodiest campaigns of revolution recorded in history. Even those who do not want to believe the links between the communism and the Illuminism must believe Engels when he stated that the League of the Just was a “secret society.” Communism is the brainchild of a secret band of criminals, plunderers, and murderers that still exists today.

In his book Secret Combinations Today, Robert E. Hales wrote that The Communist Manifesto is the most widely read book in the world. Whether or not that is true, it is certainly one of the most assigned and studied books anywhere. Hales spoke of the impact the Manifesto has had on the human family:

To blind, deceive and captivate those in other parts of the world, Satan employed the on-going work of the secret combinations. Through instruments responsive to his teachings, Satan influenced the creation of an organization with teachings and philosophies in direct opposition to the teachings of Christ. He structured this organization for the purpose of binding the souls of men. This organization spawned a new political order and found its most successful exposure through a document titled The Communist Manifesto. . . .

. . . The Communist Manifesto has had great effect upon the children of Adam, and literally billions have been and are currently held captive by those who have adopted, professed and espoused its tenets. Despite the recent crumbling of the iron curtain, hundreds of millions of people are still captivated by its tentacles” (Robert E. Hales, Secret Combinations Today: A Voice of Warning, 140).

Karl Marx was the agent used by the Evil One to popularize his gospel of hate, deception, and darkness. The Manifesto is an evil document that, admittedly, gives me a strange feeling to read – a visceral feeling of total revulsion and disgust. I cannot help but think the unpleasant feeling is caused by my spirit recoiling at doctrines that are innately wrong, inherently threatening, and totally devoid of light and truth.

I wind down this piece with a quote from Ben Moreell about what Marxists of all stripes really seek to achieve by implementing the dictates of The Communist Manifesto, and what we can do to stem the rushing tide:

The fact is that we are now mobilizing to fight a communist enemy who is supposedly thousands of miles away. But, in truth, we need not travel so far to find him.

This is not so surprising if one but stops to reflect. Communism is not an army, nor even a dictatorship. Communism is an idea. It is a belief that individual freedom, as a way of life, will not work; a belief that certain ordinary mortals like you and me, who, mostly by fortuitous circumstance, happen to occupy the seats of government for a short time, are far more capable of running your life than you are; it is a fear that if we, the people, are left free to manage our own affairs, most of us will go hungry and be cold; it is a repudiation of the free market, where willing buyers and willing sellers voluntarily arrive at a figure agreeable to both; it is a false thesis that employers and employees belong to different classes and are natural enemies; it is a process whereby some people use the power of government to make other people conform to their views and desires; it is a coerced debasement of the intelligence and integrity and dignity of the individual human being, who must bow his head in deference to the views of political masters. . . .

I am very glad that we have a form of government that requires voting, because so long as this condition exists, there is nothing to prevent us from voting against these immoral measures that are leading the American people into bondage to their own government. It is still possible to achieve freedom. If we really want to face the responsibility, to pay the price, we can still have it!” (Ben Moreell, To Communism . . . Via Majority Vote, 28, 31)

Communism seeks to obliterate individual Freedom and erase our individuality. It aims to collectivize society into an indistinguishable mass where individuals are mere cogs in the machine of the state. It desires to subjugate everyone and to make us slaves in a global GULAG. If communists get their way, national sovereignty will be demolished, a one-world dictatorship will be established, and humanity will be ushered into the Satanic dogmas of the Adversary by his Illumined henchmen.

At its core, communism is organized rebellion against God. The struggle between communism and Freedom is a spiritual one. It is light vs darkness, good vs evil, individuality vs collectivism, Liberty vs slavery, life vs death, God vs Satan. Everything mankind has traditionally held dear is on the line. The stakes are our Faith, Families, and Freedom.

communism43

We can still win this war if we are willing to pay the price. We are losing, especially in the arenas of culture and spirituality, but we can change the flow of events if we so will it. It requires sacrifice. It requires time and effort. It requires humility. It requires a willingness to study and educate ourselves and perhaps admit that we’ve been wrong about things. It requires genuine repentance. And it requires us to not only talk the talk, but walk the walk and back up our rhetoric with action. We simply must have “a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence” and “pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

Dear reader, communism is the greatest threat to Faith, Families, and Freedom that exists anywhere on earth. It is a Satanic threat. It is a literal conspiracy designed to overthrow the Liberty of all nations and bring us into bondage by the most brutal means. It openly seeks to establish a worldwide “dictatorship” where all power is “in the hands of the state.” And so, if there is one takeaway from this article, it is this: Communism must die for America to survive!

Zack Strong,

February 20, 2020

The Homosexual, the Jew, and the Indian

The Democratic Party has entered upon a brave new world as Iowan Democrats threw their support this past week behind three of the most radical candidates ever to run for high office in America: Pete Buttigieg, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren. This article will show how Buttigieg, Sanders, and Warren – a homosexual revolutionary, a Jewish-Marxist, and a fake Indian – represent the public face of the radicalized Democratic Party and what it says about America’s future.

Democrats16

The Democratic Party has perhaps never fielded such radical candidates as those currently vying for the presidential nomination. Yes, they’ve had closet communists like FDR and Obama, but they concealed their true principles in order to deceive the electorate. Today’s Democrat frontrunners, however, have gone full throttle into socialism and cultural depravity, openly courting the extreme “left.”

The apparent winner of Iowa’s Democratic primary race was Pete Buttigieg, a homosexual married to another man. When, despite some major discrepancies in the numbers, Buttigieg declared victory in Iowa, he recognized “the future first gentleman of the United States,” his husband Chasten Buttigieg. His shout out was met with raucous cheers from his mostly female crowd who began a cult-like chant of the name “Chasten.”

Perhaps Buttigieg’s descent into radicalism was inevitable. His father, the Maltese immigrant Joseph Buttigieg, was a Jesuit-Marxist university professor. The Washington Examiner reported:

The father of Democratic presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg was a Marxist professor who spoke fondly of the Communist Manifesto and dedicated a significant portion of his academic career to the work of Italian Communist Party founder Antonio Gramsci, an associate of Vladimir Lenin. . . .

He was an adviser to Rethinking Marxism, an academic journal that published articles “that seek to discuss, elaborate, and/or extend Marxian theory”. . . .

““They’re part of a wider international community of Marxist theorists and academicians with a particular devotion to the writings of the late Italian Marxist theorist Antonio Gramsci, who died over 80 years ago. Gramsci was all about applying Marxist theory to culture and cultural institutions — what is often referred to as a ‘long march through the institutions,’ such as film, media, and especially education,” [Paul] Kengor told the Washington Examiner.

Pete Buttigieg, an only child, shared a close relationship with his father. In his memoir Shortest Way Home, Pete called his dad a “man of the left”. . . .

Pete wrote that his dad was supportive when he came out as gay. . . .

A self-described progressive, [Pete] Buttigieg has called to abolish the Electoral College system, supports a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, and thinks that climate change is a national security threat.”

Buttigieg4

It is fitting that a devoted Gramscian Marxist would produce a gay, Marxist son who would seek to foist his perversions on the American public. For those who may not be aware, the homosexual movement in the United States was founded by the homosexual Harry Hay, a card-carrying member of the Communist Party USA. He founded the Mattachine Society, the first homosexual society in America. He later founded the international group Radical Faeries and the pedophile network the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA).

Communists have always been at the forefront of degrading American institutions and pressuring us to accept the abnormal, sinful, and destructive LGBT movement which is part and parcel of The Communist Manifesto’s threat to “abolish the family.” The wave of cultural Marxism sweeping over our society is the greatest threat we face. The communist-led feminist and LGBT movements are at the forefront of converting America from a Christian Republic into a godless Marxian state.

Buttigieg’s presidential campaign has proved that the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. Just like his father, Mayor Pete is a rabid Marxist. In his Latino outreach program, Buttigieg invoked a communist rallying cry. The Blaze reports:

Buttigieg announced the initiative on his social media accounts by invoking a Spanish-language slogan that is raising eyebrows among Latino leaders. The mayor of South Bend, Indiana, tweeted “El pueblo unido, jamás será vencido” (“the people united, will never be defeated”), a protest chant that was famously popularized by Latin American communists. The saying was also featured in several campaign communications, including as a call-to-action on a Latino website. . . .

It is unclear which Americans Buttigieg is referring to, but Latin American Marxists have rallied around the phrase for years.”

Buttigieg2

Buttigieg is an Episcopalian raised in Catholicism. However, as a homosexual, he’s obviously not a very good Catholic or Episcopalian. His brand of so-called Christianity” is of the Marxist variety. He believes strongly in Liberation Theology or “progressive Christianity.” R. Albert Mohler, Jr. has written:

Despite the media buzz, when you look closely at Mayor Buttigieg, you find a very progressive candidate. Though he asserts himself as a sane alternative to the far left fringes of the Democratic Party, his moral issues are in lock step with the most progressive wings of the leftist agenda.

Buttigieg, as homosexual married to a man, zealously advocates for pro-LGBTQ issues. When it comes to issues of abortion, Buttigieg supports an abortion-on-demand system fully funded by the taxpayers of the United States. According to Buttigieg, women ought to have the right to secure an abortion for virtually any circumstance at any point during a pregnancy. . . .

While Buttigieg acknowledges the existence of a creator, he avows that his sexual identity exists as an extension of the creator’s will—God made him that way. This is a common argument from LGBTQ activists that now rings louder with the candidacy of Buttigieg.

The argument, however, in no way squares with biblical orthodoxy or the teaching of Scripture.

Yet, Buttigieg demands that evangelical Christians ‘evolve’ their understanding of holy Scripture. . . .

Buttigieg subscribes to Liberation theology—specifically, he espouses LGBTQ Liberation Theology . . . This theology replaces the authority of Scripture with the authority of human experience. Moreover, it understands sin not as a transgression against the law and character of God, but as the oppression of a minority by a majority class. . . .

. . . He does not merely espouse a liberal political ideology—instead, he contends that his Christian faith leads him to no other conclusion other than a progressive agenda. He has made a theological argument for a political reality. He has reinserted liberal theology as the only viable way of reading the Scriptures. He posits a place for religion in the public square, but only a religion in line with liberal theology.”

The Marxist Pope Francis is also a proponent of Liberation Theology, as are most of his fellow Jesuits. “Christians” around the world are embracing this new social gospel and introducing radical concepts that are nowhere to be found in scripture or that blatantly contradict the Bible. For instance, against all logic and scriptural evidence, Buttigieg claims that God made him gay and that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. In an interview with CNN host Anderson Cooper, a fellow homosexual, Buttigieg responded to whether homosexuality is a sin by saying “I don’t believe it is.” He opined:

Well, the decision was definitely made way above my pay grade. And if you belong to the Christian tradition that I belong to, then you believe that God loves you and you look around and you notice that you’re gay and those two things exist at the same time.

. . . I really feel that [my] marriage moved me closer to God.”

Buttigieg subscribes to the false ideology that homosexuals are born rather than made. Of course, everyone with common sense knows that a God who has forbidden homosexuality and declared it a sin would not create His precious children gay. The fiery Christian leader, Boyd K. Packer, once said:

We teach a standard of moral conduct that will protect us from Satan’s many substitutes or counterfeits for marriage. We must understand that any persuasion to enter into any relationship that is not in harmony with the principles of the gospel must be wrong. . . .

Some suppose that they were preset and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn temptations toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! Remember, God is our Heavenly Father” (President Boyd K. Packer, “Cleansing the Inner Vessel,” General Conference, October, 2010).

Buttigieg5

A loving Father in Heaven would not give His sons and daughters unnatural same-sex tendencies. And neither does God tempt anyone to sin (James 1:13). To Buttigieg, however, his gayness makes him feel closer to God, showing just how out-of-touch he really is. If he bothered to actually read the Bible, he would know that homosexuality is bluntly condemned by the holy prophets. From God commanding us to “be fruitful, and multiply” (Genesis 1:28), which those afflicted by homosexuality literally cannot do, to commanding a man to “cleave unto his wife” (Genesis 2:24), to issuing the death penalty for homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13), to stating that homosexuality is “against nature” (Romans 1:26), the Bible clearly refutes Buttigieg and his phony social gospel.

As a homosexual progressive of Marxist lineage, Buttigieg is an almost ideal candidate for the radical socialists who masquerade as Democrats. He has said:

Here’s my message to progressives in the party: I would be the most progressive presidential nominee we’ve put forward in a generation.”

There have of course been other homosexuals in government and positions of public trust, such Eleanor Roosevelt, and many suspected homosexuals like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, but Buttigieg is different in that he has made his homosexuality the focal point of his campaign. Everything else he promotes is only a means of fundamentally transforming America from a Christian nation to a Marxist utopia where anything goes and morality is relative.

The fact that a proud homosexual, and one that harbors communist views at that, is the Democratic Party’s frontrunner tells you everything you need to know about Democrats’ moral compass – or lack thereof.

The Jew Bernie Sanders, who finished in a near statistical tie with Buttigieg in Iowa, is yet another example of the Democratic Party’s march toward communism. Though most Jews don’t like to acknowledge it, and, indeed, call it “anti-Semiticto say, the truth is that communism was created and forced upon the world primarily by Jews. Adam Weishaupt, the founder of the Order of Illuminati, was a Jew. It was an Illuminati splinter group known as the League of the Just that hired the Jew Karl Marx to polish off a manifesto containing the group’s beliefs. This was published in 1848 as The Communist Manifesto and the League renamed themselves the Communist League.

Bernie Sanders18

Eventually, the part-Jew Vladimir Lenin, who was married to a Jewess and spoke Yiddish, came to head the Communist League, by then called the Social Democratic Workers’ Party. He led this group of predominantly European Jews, funded largely by Jewish bankers, in a vicious coup against Russia. The result was the creation of the Soviet Union, whose first government was about 85% Jewish. By the 1930s, under the reign of Stalin who was married to a Jewess, 1/3 of all Jews in Russia were employed by the Soviet state as commissars, KGB thugs, and GULAG commandants.

It is fitting, then, that the most successful socialist political figure in recent American history is also a Jew. As a Jewish-Marxist, Bernie Sanders doesn’t care about preserving America’s Christian heritage. In 2017, when President Donald Trump appointed an outspoken Christian, Russell Vought, to a position in the White House, Bernie Sanders challenged his worthiness to hold the office on religious grounds. Sanders suggested that Vought was “Islamophobic” simply because he was a Christian and had said he didn’t believe in the same God as Muslims do. Therefore, Sanders voted against Mr. Vought’s appointment, showing his resentment of Christians in general.

In a Times of Israel article from earlier this month, we learn that Bolshevik Bernie considers his Jewishness a key factor in determining his politics. While campaigning in New Hampshire, Sanders was asked by a Jewish woman what role his ethnicity plays in his life. He responded:

It impacts me very profoundly. When I try to think about the views that I came to hold there are two factors. One I grew up in a family that didn’t have a lot of money . . . and the second one is being Jewish.”

The article then continued with the obligatory “Holocaust” propaganda:

Sanders recalled as a child reading “big picture books of World War II” and “tears were rolling down my cheeks” as he learned the fate of Jews. He also remembered seeing Holocaust survivors in his Brooklyn neighborhood with numbers tattooed on their arms, and a recent visit to his father’s hometown in Poland, where locals took him and his brother to a site where Nazis committed a mass murder of Jews.

Much of Sanders’ extended family perished in the Holocaust.”

The “Holocaust” has become part and parcel of the Jewish worldview. It’s rare to find a Jew that doesn’t cling religiously to the old atrocity propaganda and that doesn’t seek to punish white people and Europeans for perceived injustices and alleged “anti-Semitism.” It should be noted, however, that what they call “anti-Semitism” is actually anti-communism. And what they claim happened in the “Holocaust” has been refuted time and time again by the evidence and by historians all across the world – including some Jewish and Israeli historians.

Even the former head archivist at Auschwitz, Franciszek Piper, rejects large parts of the “Holocaust” narrative. In a video interview with the Jewish investigator David Cole, Piper stated that the infamous gas chambers” were reconstructed by the Soviets after World War II. Of course, he spun the yarn that it was a “gas chamber” before being turned into an air raid shelter . . . before again being reconverted into a “gas chamber” by the Soviets to show the world what had happened. And yet the Auschwitz tour guides tell tourists that the “gas chambers” are the originals used by those mean ol’ “Nazis.” Sounds legit. And yet people have the audacity to call me anti-Semitic for questioning what the “official” historians themselves dispute and for citing books such as Carlos Porter’s Made in Russia: The Holocaust!

Democrats18

Being Jewish almost compels Sanders into radicalism of thought and action. Communism is the most vicious version of this radicalism. Three-fourths of U.S. Jews also vote Democrat. And Jews worldwide are firmly on the socialist side of the political spectrum. Jews have been at the forefront of every socialist movement of the past two hundred years, both in our country and abroad. As Winston Churchill accurately stated:

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution, by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews, it is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others . . . Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing.”

Astonishing, indeed. The horrid screed You Gentiles, written by the Jewish Romanian author Maurice Samuel in 1924, acknowledges the Jewish hand in promoting social revolution. Samuel was proud that Jews are more disposed toward revolution than Gentiles. In fact, he said that this urge toward communistic revolution “is dominant in us.” He likewise wrote:

Jewish socialism and Jewish socialists are the banner bearers of the world’s “armies of liberation” (Maurice Samuel, You Gentiles, 142).

And again, Samuel boasted:

We Jews, we, the destroyers, will remain the destroyers forever. Nothing that you will do will meet our needs and demands. We will for ever destroy because we need a world of our own, a God-world, which is not in your nature to build” (Samuel, You Gentiles, 155).

As long as they support socialism-communism, they will indeed be “the destroyers.” As noted, international Jewry’s connection to communism is historical fact. Communism, which is a Satanic movement aimed at the “liberation” (i.e. subjugation) of mankind, is disproportionately in the hands of Jews. Bernie Sanders is yet the latest evidence of this long-established trend.

It is not only relevant, but imperative, to note that Bernie Sanders is a Jew. I personally could never bring myself to knowingly vote for a non-Christian – whether Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, or atheist – regardless of his politics. America was founded as a Christian nation and our laws were originally grounded in Biblical Christianity. When we put non-Christians into office – radicals like Bernie Sanders, Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Jerrold Nadler, Adam Schiff, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, and others – we erode that sure foundation. It is imperative that we, as a People, turn back to Jesus Christ or we will be swept off this covenant land.

Even as I emphasize Sanders’ Jewishness, I hasten to clarify that his true religion and loyalty is to global communism. He is part of the murder cult of communism and was an open advocate of Soviet Russia at the height of the Cold War. Bernie wants to bring the United States into the Bolshevik brotherhood of slavery and misery. That a Jewish-socialist is on the verge of commandeering the Democratic Party should tell us all how far we’ve sunk as a nation.

Bernie Sanders27

One of the finest minds of the founding era, John Jay, encouraged Americans to vote for Christians. He said it is not only our privilege, but our duty. I end my remarks about Bolshevik Bernie Sanders with John Jay’s relevant quotation:

Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation, to select and prefer Christians for their rulers” (John Jay to John Murray, Jr., October 12, 1816, in Henry P. Johnston, ed., The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Vol. 4).

We now come to Elizabeth Warren, the Marxist dolt who thinks she’s an Indian. Warren is, without a doubt, one of the looniest candidates to run in a long time. Business Insider reported the following about Warren’s Indian controversy:

Records indicate that various points in her career, Warren went between identifying as white and Native American. The year before she was hired at the University of Pennsylvania, 1986, she listed herself as a ‘Minority Law Teacher’ on the American Association of Law Schools directory, a tip sheet for school administrators. She continued to list herself as such until 1995 and was repeatedly referenced as a minority in Penn’s yearly equity report. . . .

Warren’s campaign never offered conclusive evidence, but she told reporters that “being Native American is part of who our family is and I’m glad to tell anyone about that. I am just very proud of it.” . . . .

The New England genealogical society at first backed Warren’s claim, but upon further investigation, retracted their support, re-igniting the debate.”

Warren3

After President Trump challenged Pocahontas, as he likes to call her, to take a DNA test to substantiate her claims, she did. It was discovered that she is indeed an Indian . . . that is, if you consider 1/1024 Cherokee blood enough to qualify you as an Indian!

Warren at first boasted that the DNA test proved her claims – she was a real Indian. Then she later apologized for claiming she is Cherokee when the Cherokee Nation rebuffed her. I quote now from ZeroHedge article:

The unexpected apology breaks from Warren’s previous public stance, in which she refused to admit fault. . . .

The apology follows the publication of an opinion column by Chuck Hoskin Jr, the secretary of state of the Cherokee Nation, in the Tulsa World on Wednesday titled, “Elizabeth Warren can be a friend, but she isn’t a Cherokee citizen.”

In the column, Hoskin said Warren’s test, which her office said showed strong evidence that Ms. Warren has Native American pedigree “6-10 generations ago,” did not take into account that, for most Native Americans, culture and kinship is what creates tribal membership — not blood, and certainly not 1/1024th thereof.

““This concept of family is key to understanding why citizenship matters,” Mr. Hoskin wrote. “That is why it offends us when some of our national leaders seek to ascribe inappropriately membership or citizenship to themselves. They would be welcome to our table as friends, but claiming to be family to gain a spot at the table is unwelcome.””

Warren should be unwelcome at ever table in America, not just at the Indians’ table. But lying about being an Indian isn’t the only thing she’s fabricated. She once alleged that she was fired as an elementary school teacher because she was pregnant. The facts, however, contradict her feminist propaganda. The Washington Freebeacon reported:

The Riverdale Board of Education approved a second-year teaching contract for a young Elizabeth Warren, documents show, contradicting the Democratic presidential candidate’s repeated claims that she was asked not to return to teaching after a single year because she was “visibly pregnant.” . . . .

The Board of Education minutes show a part-time contract for her first year of teaching received unanimous approval during an August 1970 board meeting. Meeting minutes from November 1970 confirm Warren’s account that she was working on an “emergency” teaching certificate, showing unanimous approval “that a provisional certificate be requested for Mrs. Elizabeth Warren in speech therapy.”

Toward the end of Warren’s first year on the job, in April 1971, the board approved her contract for the following school year, the meeting minutes show. Two months later, the meeting minutes indicate that Warren had tendered her resignation.

““The resignation of Mrs. Elizabeth Warren, speech correctionist effective June 30, 1971 was accepted with regret,” the June 16, 1971, minutes say.”

Warren8

Clearly, Warren’s fabricated tale of being fired is about as true as her stories of Indian heritage. Perhaps her 1/1024th Indian blood is causing her, like other Indians, to see injustices where they don’t exist; and to invent “atrocities” that never happened.

When she’s not trying to bury the hatchet with her fellow Indian squaws and braves or speaking with a forked tongue about being fired from a job she actually resigned from, she’s out on the war path proposing spending plans that would bankrupt the nation. To wit, Warren recently concocted a socialist medicare plan “that would cost $52 trillion over the next decade, including $20 trillion in new spending, which would be covered largely by an array of taxes on corporations, the wealthy and employers in general.” Who doesn’t love new taxes? Especially in a time of economic boom!

Elizabeth Warren is perhaps the ultimate hack in the Democratic Party. But she isn’t just daft. She is also malicious. Fearing what the truth would do to expose her as the enemy to the Republic she is, Pocahontas has introduced a scheme to criminalize what she calls “disinformation.” In an article “Criminalizing free speech online? Elizabeth Warren has a plan for that,” Brad Polumbo wrote:

On Wednesday, the 2020 candidate released a plan that would impose criminal and civil penalties on those who are deemed guilty of spreading “disinformation.” In a tweet unveiling the plan, she said, “Disinformation and online foreign interference erode our democracy, and Donald Trump has invited both.” The Massachusetts Democrat continued, “Anyone who seeks to challenge and defeat Donald Trump in the 2020 election must be fully prepared to take this on—and I’ve got a plan to do it.” . . .

There is a real issue with people believing fake or misleading information they see online. . . .

But criminalizing “misinformation”? That’s the stance of a dictator seeking to squash dissent, not a candidate trying to win over voters earnestly.”

Specifically, Warren proposed:

Push to create civil and criminal penalties for knowingly disseminating false information about when and how to vote in U.S. elections . . . I will push for new laws that impose tough civil and criminal penalties for knowingly disseminating this kind of information, which has the explicit purpose of undermining the basic right to vote.”

Warren7

This prompts several questions, especially for a person like myself who is constantly writing about political candidates and current events. For one, would I be penalized for writing that Warren is a fake Indian? Though she is technically 1/1024 Indian, that hardly seems enough to qualify. If she qualifies as Indian, then I certainly do through a not-too-distant ancestor on my Dad’s side. Also, would I be penalized for calling Bernie Sanders “Bolshevik Bernie” since he’s not technically a Bolshevik (though his principles are Bolshevist)? Or would I be penalized for saying that Pete Buttigieg is not a real Christian because of his belief in “progressive Christianity”? In all honesty, who gets to decide what is and is not “disinformation”? Snopes? The Democratic Party?

Joseph Sacco, writing for The Resurgent, summed up what Warren’s scheme is really all about:

Between all the talk of free college, student loan debt forgiveness, and impeachment, Elizabeth Warren is out to destroy whatever freedoms she doesn’t like.

Warren plans on destroying the First Amendment and the rights of corporations by holding corporations accountable if misinformation is spread on their platforms and it affects voter turnout.

How Warren’s plan would actually determine how or when said misinformation is not clear but she is very sure that they should be punished. . . .

I find it especially rich that a candidate who lied about her Native American “heritage” is now lecturing American’s and corporations about spreading disinformation, and then threatening them with criminal charges.

But again, progressives are about power and control and they will destroy the rights of those who don’t agree with them.”

And that is the heart of why Pocahontas is so wrong – because she is a “progressive” (i.e. Marxist). Like all socialists, she seeks power. And she seeks power by centralizing all things in the hands of the state. From destroying our right to speak out and spread information online, to proposing plans to bankrupt the country, Elizabeth Warren has shown her true colors. She may not be a red-skinned Indian, but she is Red through and through.

Warren10

When you consider their radical principles, outlandish policy proposals, and routine lies, what do Buttigieg, Sanders, and Warren mean for America? I submit that the campaigns of these three Marxists constitute a manifestation of the dramatic cultural shift taking place in our country. While there may be political wins now and then, we have lost nearly every battle on the cultural front.

The LGBT, feminist, transgender, and MGTOW movements are tearing apart our families and marriages and producing a generation of confused young people. Christianity is decreasing at the same time Wicca is the fastest-growing religion in America. The Satanic Temple and other perverse groups are busy erecting Satanic statues throughout the nation and infiltrating local city councils with pagans who are replacing Christian prayers with pagan ones. The infanticide of American infants rolls on. Pornography is on the rise and the Lord’s law of chastity has become virtually meaningless. Profanity is becoming normal and accepted. In almost every discernible way, the American People are losing touch with their Christian roots.

The advent of the Homosexual, the Jew, and the Indian in American politics foretells of darker days yet to come. It portends future flirtation with the forces of cultural Marxism. It suggests that we are becoming desensitized and are beginning to accept what our forefathers understood was harmful. We know from Alexander Pope’s famous saying, that people eventually embrace what they tolerate. He wrote:

Vice is a monster of so frightful mien, As to be hated needs but to be seen; Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face, We first endure, then pity, then embrace.”

Democrats17

God help us to wake up before we become so accustomed to seeing sexual degenerates, communists, and liars parade before our eyes that we eventually embrace them. May we realize that putting homosexuals like Pete Buttigieg, Marxist Jews like Bernie Sanders, and liars like the fake Indian Elizabeth Warren, into public office can only be dangerous for our Republic. We need men of integrity, virtue, and Christian piety to represent us – not anti-Christians, Marxists, and phonies. Let us finally realize, dear reader, that the Democrats’ brave new world, were we to embrace it, would be a hellish dystopia straight out of Marx’s wildest fantasies.

Zack Strong,

February 11, 2020

Past Feeling

Civilization is in crisis. Our moral compass is haywire and we have wandered far off the correct path. Few acts exemplify this confusion of ethics better than elective abortion – the willful murder of one’s offspring. Abortion is the ultimate sign that society has become past feeling.

abortion39

Past feeling” is a phrase used in scripture to describe those whose hearts have hardened and who have left the Gospel path. In his letter to the Ephesian Saints, the Apostle Paul gave this encouragement:

[W]alk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind,

Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:

Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness” (Ephesians 4:17-19).

Paul reminded his fellow Christians that disciples of the Master cannot walk as others do. We are meant to be a “peculiar people” (1 Peter 2:9). When we embrace the Savior’s covenant path, we embrace a new and higher way of life and forever leave behind old habits and corrupt ways of thought and behavior. Those who reject the Gospel of Jesus Christ alienate themselves “from the life of God.” This self-alienation comes because of ignorance, blindness of heart, and sin. A symbol of this alienation is that people become “past feeling.”

Those who are “past feeling” are those who have “their conscience seared with a hot iron” (1 Timothy 4:2). They have willfully rebelled against God and His laws to such an extent that they become numb to the Holy Spirit and can no longer properly hear or understand His quiet and subtle promptings. They are those who “are without God in the world” and who “have gone contrary to the nature of God” (Alma 41:11). All of us can slip into this state of unfeeling if we are not careful and if we do not guard ourselves against enemy interference.

A person who is “past feeling” sees the world differently and abnormally. Up is down. Black is white. Evil is good. This tragic state of affairs is a direct fulfillment of Isaiah’s ancient prophecy that people would call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” (Isaiah 5:20)

evil

Because their consciences are seared, they cannot reliably make moral judgment calls. They are not in tune with the Holy Spirit of God. A wise man gave an analogy about hearing the voice of the Holy Ghost. He first compared the process to using an old radio set to hone in on the proper signal and then observed:

In terms of modern communication, crystal radio sets helped us emerge from the dark ages of communication. With advanced technology, cellular phones are used for much of the communication in our time. Occasionally, however, we find dead spots where the signal coming to a cell phone fails. This can happen when the cell phone user is in a tunnel or a canyon or when there is other interference.

So it is with divine communication. The still, small voice, though still and small, is very powerful. It “whispereth through and pierceth all things.” But like my old crystal set, the message may be there but we fail to pick it up. Perhaps something in our lives prevents us from hearing the message because we are “past feeling.” We often put ourselves in spiritual dead spotsplaces and situations that block out divine messages. Some of these dead spots include anger, pornography, transgression, selfishness, and other situations that offend the Spirit” (President James E. Faust, “Did You Get the Right Message?” General Conference, April, 2004).

Using a similar analogy, Boyd K. Packer, who was a fearless defender of the faith against the forces of cultural depravity, warned:

The world grows increasingly noisy. . . .

This trend to more noise, more excitement, more contention, less restraint, less dignity, less formality is not coincidental nor innocent nor harmless.

The first order issued by a commander mounting a military invasion is the jamming of the channels of communication of those he intends to conquer” (President Boyd K. Packer, “Reverence Invites Revelation,” General Conference, October, 1991).

Satan is the arch-enemy of mankind. He is the commanding general of the forces of wickedness. He is father of all lies. In order to get us to believe his harmful deceptions, he first has to jam our communication lines. He has to disrupt the flow of subtle messages from the Holy Spirit to our individual spirits. He does this through at least three methods: 1) Luring us into sin; 2) encouraging our neglect; and 3), convincing us of false ideas.

unnamed (2)

Sin is the most obvious way we disrupt our channels of communication. Whether through indulgence in pornography, substance abuse, dishonesty, pride, greed, adultery, or unwarranted violence, sin causes the Holy Spirit to flee. The Holy Spirit is, as the title suggests, holy. A holy being cannot and will not remain in a filthy environment. If you pollute and stain your soul, you drive the Holy Spirit out. The moment you begin to clean up the figurative mess, however, He rushes back in and helps you take out the trash.

Next, I use an analogy to talk about how neglect weakens our communication lines. If we do not charge our phone’s battery and it dies, we cannot use it to make or receive calls. It doesn’t matter if it is the latest and greatest version of the iPhone or an old flip-phone. Without a charged batter, you simply can’t make or receive calls or texts. Through neglect, we figuratively allow our spiritual batteries to die. Our spiritual muscles become atrophied overtime unless we stretch and use them. Rusty spiritual communication lines are certainly a factor in people becoming past feeling.

Thirdly, adopting false notions such as the anti-Christ concept of organic evolution, the Devilish dogmas of communism, or the idea that killing one’s children is acceptable extinguishes the influence of the Holy Ghost in your life. You cannot simultaneously harbor contradictory worldviews. As the Lord taught:

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon” (Matthew 6:24).

We might be sincere. We might really believe an idea. But ultimately we cannot believe two contradictory principles. They cancel each other out. We cannot stand on both sides of the dividing line between good and evil. We either believe the teachings of the Gospel of Jesus Christ or we don’t.

For example, we simply cannot believe that man evolved from a lower species because it has been revealed: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Genesis 1:26). To believe the idea of organic evolution is to believe either that the Genesis account of creation is fraudulent or that God is something lesser than man. Both suppositions are false and would nullify the entire Gospel of Jesus Christ. They undercut the profound reality that we are the literal children of our Father in Heaven.

abortion400

By the same token, we cannot believe in the command “thou shalt not kill” and also think elective abortion – the unnecessary and voluntary killing of a child – is fine and dandy. Either we believe that we have no right to kill another unless in self-defense or to punish one who has forfeited his right to life through the malicious violation of another’s rights, or we believe that we have a right to kill. There is no middle ground. There is no third position. Either humans have a right to destroy the lives of their children or they do not. Since the Gospel of our Redeemer teaches quite clearly in multiple places “Thou shalt not kill” (Exodus 20:13), it stands that to advocate killing – for any illegitimate reason – is contrary to the Gospel.

When we wander in sin, neglect our duties relative to God and our fellow men, or adopt false philosophies, we sear our conscience and jam our crucial lines of communication with God. As such, we become “past feeling” and we “quench” the Holy Spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:19). In this darkened state, we often gravitate towards greater darkness. It is the nature of things to be attracted to things that are similar. As a revelation states:

For intelligence cleaveth unto intelligence; wisdom receiveth wisdom; truth embraceth truth; virtue loveth virtue; light cleaveth unto light; mercy hath compassion on mercy and claimeth her own; justice continueth its course and claimeth its own” (Doctrine and Covenants 88:40).

When we become past feeling, we embrace those things that are devoid of spirit, life, and light because they are comfortable and familiar. Once we successfully silence the voice of our conscience and disrupt the communications from the Holy Ghost, we are led into hedonism. We live for ourselves and don’t care about others. Our creed in life becomes, “How does this benefit me?”

To carnal individuals, the responsibilities and self-sacrifice required in marriage and parenthood are burdensome. Self-centered women who value sex and carefree living over all other things naturally embrace abortion as a means of continuing their hedonistic lifestyles while avoiding the “inconvenience” of motherhood. Lustful men, too, encourage abortion so that they can avoid the duties of fatherhood and continue sleeping around and not thinking of anyone but themselves.

In my article “Abortionism – Cult of Death,” I quoted a LifeSiteNews piece that hits the nail on the head. It explains the perverse rationale behind abortion:

““Abortionism” is essentially a philosophy that raises abortion to a sacred status, above all other democratic principles.

. . . Abortion’s now-sacred status is symptomatic of something far more sinister: the sweeping success of the Sexual Revolution. So-called “sexual rights” are now considered to be the most important “rights” our society has, and take precedence over all other rights, regardless of how fundamental they are.”

abortion58

A hedonistic and selfish society is one that almost has to adopt abortion. Unless they have carte blanche on removing any impediment to their libidinous lifestyle, even if that “impediment” is another human life, they will be forced to be responsible individuals who do what dutiful individuals have always done – find a mate, marry, and create a family. When a person’s conscience is seared and they have become numb and past feeling, however, they stop thinking straight. Their only consideration becomes how they can find pleasure and feed their ravenous animal desires.

People who are so past feeling that they only think about self-gratification are those who invent emotion-driven slogans like “pro-choice,” “women’s rights,” and “my body, my choice” to justify snuffing out the lives of unborn human beings – human beings with arms and legs, fingers and toes, skin and eyes, functioning organs and a heart beat. A pregnant woman’s choices do not involve her body alone – they involve the body of another developing, growing human being. Through sexual intercourse, they have voluntarily created this life. Once that decision is made, they have no right to cancel it out because doing so terminates the life of a separate, unique human being – a son or daughter of Almighty God.

Think of how ghastly abortion really is. The very idea of a mother willfully killing her children is repugnant and disgusting to anyone who is not past feeling. Anyone with a functioning moral compass knows that elective abortion – that is, the unnecessary and wholly voluntary termination of the life of another human being for selfish purposes – is not only wrong, but evil.

We are frequently told that women are much more emotionally prescient than men. I suppose that a well-grounded woman has better motherly instincts than a man. Why shouldn’t she? She’s a woman and women were appointed to the holy and high calling of motherhood. However, I question the popular notion that women are more in tune than men when I see thousands of women in the streets marching for their alleged “right” to mutilate and kill their babies. When I see thousands of feminist women demanding, sometimes violently, the “right” to commit infanticide, it disgusts me.

No one has a “right” to kill babies. That is not a “right;” that is murder. It is heartless and evil. And simply because a human being has not yet developed as completely as another does not give anyone the right to kill him. If we use that perverse and flawed logic, we could say that children one, two, three, or four years old who have not matured yet – either physically or mentally – can be killed, too. Don’t think I’m being facetious. After-birth abortion – that is, the murder of already born children – has been advocated by abortion extremists throughout the world.

A rationale for after-birth abortion (i.e. murder) was given by two people clearly past feeling:

[W]hen circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible. . . . [W]e propose to call this practice ‘after-birth abortion’, rather than ‘infanticide,’ to emphasize that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus . . . rather than to that of a child. Therefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk” (Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, in William Saletan, “After-Birth Abortion: The pro-choice case for infanticide,” Slate, March 12, 2012).

What Giubilini, Minerva, and all those who think like them, want is society to allow them to murder children for their own convenience. To disguise the fact that this is murder, they try to use medical terminology. But infanticide by any other name is still infanticide. It is human sacrifice on the altar of the Evil One.

Let me be clear: I am not referring to the less than 1% of abortion cases involving rape, incest, or severe medical issues. I’m speaking of elective, voluntary, willful abortion. Elective abortion is, by definition, never necessary. It is an unnecessary medical procedure whose purpose is not to save but to destroy. It is the deliberate execution of another human being. It is the intentional taking of life.

I repeat: You do not have a “right” to take another person’s life – even if their body happens to be temporarily inside of you. To reason that you have a “right” to kill is to admit that you are past feeling. And for a mother of all people to flippantly say, “My body, my choice” (i.e. “I can kill my children and there’s nothing you can do about it), is not only delusional, but reprehensible in the extreme.

Don’t be fooled by the deceptive Marxian language about “rights,” “equality,” and “choice.” These emotion-laden words are meant to get you to lower your guard and accept things which your sensitive spirit knows are wrong. If you let your guard down long enough, you can adopt so much of that which is evil that you become past feeling and join those who are openly rebelling against God.

abortion60

The great Christian leader, Boyd K. Packer, once said:

World leaders and court judges agree that the family must endure if we are to survive. At the same time, they use the words freedom and choice as tools to pry apart the safeguards of the past and loosen up the laws on marriage, abortion, and gender. In so doing, they promote the very things which threaten the family. . . .

When we speak plainly of divorce, abuse, gender identity, contraception, abortion, parental neglect, we are thought by some to be way out of touch or to be uncaring. Some ask if we know how many we hurt when we speak plainly. Do we know of marriages in trouble, of the many who remain single, of single-parent families, of couples unable to have children, of parents with wayward children, or of those confused about gender? Do we know? Do we care?

Those who ask have no idea how much we care; you know little of the sleepless nights, of the endless hours of work, of prayer, of study, of travelall for the happiness and redemption of mankind.

Because we do know and because we do care, we must teach the rules of happiness without dilution, apology, or avoidance. That is our calling” (President Boyd K. Packer, “The Father and the Family,” General Conference, April, 1994).

Every soul is precious to God – and none more than those of innocent children who are pure and sinless, having come straight from His presence. He is the literal Father of all who come into mortality. We are His special sons and daughters. He surely weeps as He watches His children misuse their agency to literally butcher and kill each other – and then to justify it by saying it’s their “right.”

As Christians, we have a duty to denounce evil and promote goodness. We have a duty to follow the commandments and to use our influence, great or small, to thwart Satan’s plan – a plan which involves persuading people to kill their own children. We must not allow words like “choice” to disarm us or dissuade us from doing what is right.

Thou shalt not kill.” This is the command. A woman’s voluntary decision to sleep with a man and risk becoming pregnant does not negate the Lord’s command, nor does it negate a human being’s right to live. It is not an assault on Freedom of choice to prohibit elective abortion. Rather, it is a protection of our God-given rights, chief among which is the right of life. Those who cannot yet defend themselves enjoy the same right to live and breathe as you do. If not, then we live in a savage, might-makes-right, Darwinistic mire.

Our civilization can hardly be considered civilized when we take into account the 70+ million innocent babies whose lives we’ve destroyed in a brutal and merciless holocaust. The millions of babies who have died in horrible agony as their little bodies were literally torn apart and then vacuumed out of their mother’s womb would tell you, if they could, that they wanted to live; that they had a right to live; that it was their body and their choice to live, grow, experience earth life, and be held by a loving mother. Is that too much too ask?

To those who are past feeling, anything that prevents their full hedonistic self-gratification is too much to ask. The anguish of butchered babies means nothing to the self-absorbed who reject eternal law. Those whose hearts have been hardened and minds darkened to such an extent that they ruthlessly champion their so-called “right” to murder human beings have marked themselves as enemies to humanity, to our God-given rights, and to the Liberty vouchsafed by the Constitution of the United States.

abortion55

It is therefore the duty of every right-thinking individual – especially every Christian – who is not past feeling and who can still recognize the sweet influence of the Holy Spirit, to stand up in defense of the defenseless. It is our sacred responsibility not only to “be fruitful, and multiply” (Genesis 1:28), but to ensure that the right of life is extended to all those spirits whom our Father in Heaven desires to send into mortality. We must, as our Master did, go about doing good (Acts 10:38). And what cause is of more worth than defending the right of life of the most needy, innocent, and worthy among us?

Dear reader, abortion is evil. It is little more than coldblooded murder. It is a symptom of a spiritual sickness far worse than the hyped Coronavirus or smallpox. One thing is certain: An individual, group, or society that tolerates the slaughter of their infants is past feeling. God help us to repent. God help us to properly value life. And God help us to feel again!

Zack Strong,

February 9, 2020

State Flags and American Values

All Americans recognize the U.S. flag. We all know the stars and stripes when we see them. However, many Americans may not be able to identify individual state flags. There are are fifty state flags and many of them give us a hint about what we as Americans cherish and stand for. This article will give an overview of what some of our state flags reveal about the values Americans have traditionally held dear.

flag of Pennsylvania1

The Pennsylvania flag is one of the most interesting. The state coat of arms was designed in 1777 and used on the militia flag of 1799. In 1907, the current flag, bearing the coast of arms, was finally adopted. The image shows a plow, wheat stalks, and a ship, surrounded by corn stalks and olive branches, with two horses on the sides and a bald eagle on top. The words “Virtue, Liberty, and Independence” show at the bottom. The various symbols represent the industry of Pennsylvanians, the prosperity and abundance of the state, and the loyalty of the state’s citizens to the Union.

The three words on the flag of course have the most overt message. Let’s discuss the word “virtue.” When you examine letters, documents, speeches, and sermons from the founding era, you find mention of the word “virtue” everywhere. Pennsylvania’s own Benjamin Franklin once wrote:

I understand it to be the Will of God, that we should live virtuous, upright, and good-doing Lives. . . .

. . . Faith is recommended as a Means of producing Morality: Our Saviour was a Teacher of Morality or Virtue. . . .

. . . Peace, Unity and Virtue in any Church are more to be regarded than Orthodoxy . . . Morality or Virtue is the End, Faith only a Means to obtain that End No point of Faith is so plain, as that Morality is our Duty; for all Sides agree in that. A virtuous Heretick shall be saved before a wicked Christian” (Benjamin Franklin, “Dialogue Between Two Presbyterians,” April 10, 1735).

Even those not considered particularly religious were expected, by society, to be virtuous. Being virtuous was held in high regard by the ancient Romans and early Americans believed it was paramount for their fledgling Republic. Virtue was considered a part of citizenship. President George Washington explained:

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. . . .

It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government” (George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796).

George Washington52

Virtue was seen as the embodiment of manliness, loyalty, morality, character, sturdiness in principle, the Christian faith, and so on. Without virtue, there could be no civil society and no Liberty. It was the “spring” from whence came our government. John Adams said it this way:

Statesmen my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand. . . . The only foundation of a free Constitution, is pure Virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our People, in a greater Measure, than they have it now, They may change their Rulers, and the forms of Government, but they will not obtain a lasting Liberty.—They will only exchange Tyrants and Tyrannies” (John Adams to Zabdiel Adams, June 21, 1776).

Virtue, then, was considered the keystone of Americanism and a prerequisite of true patriotism. It was essential to the other two words on Pennsylvania’s flag – Liberty and Independence. Pennsylvania is not the only state, however, with such slogans proudly emblazoned on its flag.

Iowa’s flag proclaims: “Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain.” The words are written on a banner being carried in the beak of a flying eagle. Simple, yet powerful. The design is compelling and the expression is true. It’s sad to watch the ongoing Democratic Party caucus catastrophe making a mockery of that state and of its election process. It is equally sad to see that radicals like the homosexual socialist Pete Buttigieg, the Jewish-Marxist Bernie Sanders, and the fake Indian Elizabeth Warren leading the Democratic wolf pack in the state. Yet, if the people of Iowa ever need inspiration to guide their choices in the future, they need only look at their flag and take its words to heart. Valuing our God-given rights and maintaining them through selfless sacrifice has always been the duty of an American freeman.

Georgia’s great flag has several important messages. Set in a pattern unmistakably similar to Old Glory, the flag bears the words “Constitution,” “Wisdom,” “Justice,” “Moderation,” and “In God We Trust.” The words are part of our surrounding an arch on top of pillars. A soldier in a Revolutionary War uniform stands holding a sword, ready to defend the Constitution.

flag of Georgia1

Though not always the design of the state flag, the current image tells us a lot. The flag points our minds to those things which are most important: God, the Constitution, and values like justice and wisdom. Abraham Baldwin, one of Georgia’s signers of the U.S. Constitution, had a major hand in creating the University of Georgia. In the university’s 1785 charter, we find these wise recommendations:

As it is the distinguishing happiness of free governments that civil Order should be the Result of choice and not necessity, and the common wishes of the People become the Laws of the Land, their public prosperity and even existence very much depends upon suitably forming the minds and morals of their Citizens. When the Minds of people in general are viciously disposed and unprincipled and their Conduct disorderly, a free government will be attended with greater Confusions and with Evils more horrid than the wild, uncultivated State of Nature. It can only be happy where the public principles and Opinions are properly directed and their Manners regulated. This is an influence beyond the Stretch of Laws and punishments and can be claimed only by Religion and Education. It should therefore be among the first objects of those who wish well to the national prosperity to encourage and support the principles of Religion and morality, and early to place the youth under the forming hand of Society that by instruction they may be moulded to the love of Virtue and good Order.”

You will notice the similarity in sentiment in these ideas and those of John Adams and George Washington. Everyone in our founding era knew that Freedom – even that protected by a written constitution as marvelous of our own – cannot remain and will profit little if the People are not virtuous. If our manners are not regulated by bringing them into harmony with the principles of religion and morality, and if we are not “moulded to the love of Virtue and good Order,” our Liberty will turn to licentiousness and our Republic will crumble. Georgia’s flag reminds us that we must trust in God and embrace just principles in order to maintain our Constitution.

flag of Rhode Island1

Rhode Island, one of the original thirteen states, has a simple flag with another great message: Hope. The flag depicts a golden anchor above the word “Hope” surrounded by thirteen golden stars. Several sources attribute the impetus for using the word to the Apostle Paul who said that hope is “an anchor of the soul” (Hebrews 6:19). Specifically, our hope was to rest in Jesus Christ and His promise of eternal life to the faithful. Rhode Island’s flag, therefore, is another reminder that our forefathers looked to Christ and relied upon the “protection of divine Providence” in their endeavors.

Finally, I discuss what is likely my favorite state flag – the flag of Virginia. Certainly this flag is the most evocative of them all. The flag has gone through some superficial alterations, but has remained substantively the same. Virginia’s seal, which shows on her flag, was designed by a committee of four patriots in 1776: George Wythe, George Mason, Richard Henry Lee, and Robert Carter Nicholas Sr. George Wythe, the personal tutor of Thomas Jefferson, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, and a temporary delegate to the Constitutional Convention, was the primary creator of the seal.

flag of Virginia3

The seal depicts the Roman goddess Virtus, or Virtue, standing triumphantly over the slain body of a despotic king. Virtus holds both a spear and a sword whereas the fallen king’s whip and chain, symbols of his oppressive rule, lay impotently on the ground along with his crown. The Latin phrase Sic Semper Tyrannis, “thus always to tyrants,” or, more popularly, “death to tyrants,” features prominently on the image.

Virginia’s flag sums up the core American values of resistance to tyrants and obedience to God. Americans once believed that when the laws of despotic rulers contradict those of Almighty God, they had a sacred duty to resist and depose the despots and honor God instead. They certainly did not believe the mistaken doctrine that individuals owe blind obedience to their government no matter what. Instead, they knew that freemen only owe obedience to just laws – laws that safeguard their rights. Benjamin Franklin’s proposed motto for the nation summed up our forefathers’ attitude: “Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.”

John Adams reiterated the right of the American People – or any people – to kill a tyrant. He wrote:

The right of a nation to kill a tyrant, in cases of necessity, can no more be doubted, than that to hang a robber, or kill a flea. But killing one tyrant only makes way for a worse, unless the people have sense, spirit, and honesty enough to establish and support a constitution guarded at all points against tyranny; against the tyranny of the one, the few, and the many. Let it be the study, therefore, of lawgivers and philosophers, to enlighten the people’s understandings and improve their morals, by good and general education; to enable them to comprehend the scheme of government, and to know upon what points their liberties depend; to dissipate those vulgar prejudices and popular superstitions that oppose themselves to good government; and to teach them that obedience to the laws is as indispensable in them as in lords and kings” (John Adams, “Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America,” 1787).

It is further significant that Virginia’s bold flag was adopted in 1861 when Virginia succeeded from the Union after Abraham Lincoln arbitrarily and unconstitutionally raised an army to attack South Carolina. Virginians in 1861 knew that Abraham Lincoln was a tyrant who treated the Constitution like toilet paper. It was with Lincoln’s despotism in mind that they adopted the state seal with the iconic words Sic Semper Tyrannis as the official flag of the Old Dominion. It was this very phrase, death to tyrants, that John Wilkes Booth yelled when he shot President Lincoln in Ford’s Theater four years later.

Sic Semper Tyrannis is a phrase that all Americans should keep on the tip of their tongues. The great Thomas Jefferson proclaimed:

God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion . . . What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants” (Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, November 13, 1787).

flag of Virginia4

Not only do Virginia’s tyrannical Democrat leaders who are assaulting the 2nd Amendment need to be warned and rebuked, but all American representatives who are threatening the God-given, Constitution-protected rights of Americans need to be warned and threatened. They need to know that “death to tyrants” isn’t an archaic notion, but an eternal American verity.

Many of America’s state flags are interesting and many are striking. However, it is the message they convey that matters. And, taken as a whole, they remind us of those things that made America great in the first place: Reliance upon God; hope centered in Jesus Christ; love of Liberty; ordered Freedom protected by the Constitution; and our People’s virtue. These are the things that really matter. They are the heart of what it means to be an American.

In this time of deep division and cultural crisis, we need to look to the past. The slogans of our noble past, those wise mottoes which fly overhead every day, point the way to the future. If we truly want to make America great again, we must recover and act upon the core values that made us great in the first place.

We have some very hard questions to ask ourselves as Americans. For starters, we can decide the following: Are we freemen who believe in Liberty and Independence or servile serfs who kow-tow to our own government representatives? Are we Americans whose hope centers in Christ or are we like godless socialists who put their trust in the state? Are we real Christians like our forefathers or will we reject our authentic heritage in favor anti-Christ systems of belief?

America239

Fellow American, look to our state and national mottoes for guidance. Make “In God We Trust” a part of your everyday life. Uphold the principles of Liberty. And stand firm in defense of your rights with “Sic Semper Tyrannis” on your lips. God help us to restore our Republic!

Zack Strong,

February 6, 2020

I Hope Bernie Sanders Wins

In the year [2020], the United States and the rest of the world face two very different political paths.” – Bernie Sanders

Yes, you read the title correctly: I hope Bernie Sanders wins the Democratic Party nomination. In 2016, I wrote an article for the Independent American Party wherein I stated that the biggest story of the year was not President Trump’s meteoric rise, but the fact that Bernie Sanders – an open and avowed socialist – was so close to securing the Democratic Party’s nomination for president. Because of Bernie Sanders’ blatant admission that he is a socialist, I want him to win the Democratic Party nomination in 2020 so that the enemy no longer has a mask to hide behind.

Bernie Sanders11

For decades, Republicans and Democrats alike have pretended to be something they’re not. They’ve lied to the American People about who they are and what they stand for. They’ve deliberately obscured and downplayed their party platforms in their effort to convince average folks that they’re real patriots who love America.

If these two wings of the same bird of prey were honest, however, they’d sing a much different tune. If Democrats told the truth, they would tell the American People that they are full-fledged socialists who want to massively expand the federal government, shred the Constitution, and curtail individual rights. Republicans would also be forced to admit that their principles have drifted so far into the Red that they are also socialists, though on the whole not as extreme as the Democrats. At least many Republicans don’t yet think infanticide is a human right (though, sadly, they do little to protect the unborn).

The superficial division between socialist Democrats and socialist Republicans is similar to that between European socialists at the start of the Twentieth Century. In 1903, the Social-Democratic Workers’ Party divided into two factions, the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. Despite being in the minority, Vladimir Lenin’s faction called themselves “Bolsheviks,” which comes from the Russian word bolshinstvo, or “majority.” The term “Menshevik” comes from the word “menshinstvo,” or minority. The latter group included notable figures such as the Jewish Marxist Leon Trotsky who later joined Lenin and became the number two man in the Soviet Union.

The difference between the Bolshevik and Menshevik point of view was slim and primarily concerned tactics rather than principles. The Mensheviks wanted to work through the political process to gain governmental power whereas the Bolsheviks contended that violent revolution was necessary to secure control of the state. In both cases, however, the ultimate objectives of their collective ideology were the same: Establish a Marxist monopoly on power across the globe; abolish private property; abolish the family; collectivize humanity; and rid the world of the “opium of the masses” (i.e. Christianity). And considering the fact that the Russian Revolution of 1905 was led by the Mensheviks, the reality is that there was no substantive difference between them and the Bolsheviks.

Today, Republicans and Democrats are in a similar situation. They outwardly quarrel about tactics (though occasionally on principles), but lock arms in their march toward centralization of federal power, expansion of the police state, continuation of bogus foreign wars, acceptance of cultural perversions, kow-towing to Israel, playing easy with communism, eviscerating our privacy, silencing our Freedom of speech and association, restricting the 2nd Amendment, and destroying the protections of our God-given rights codified in the Constitution.

RD1

Let’s make this even clearer: Democrats take us to war. Republicans take us to war. Democrats raise the specter of “Islamic terrorism.” Republicans raise the specter of “Islamic terrorism.” Democrats voted to pass the Patriot Act. Republicans voted to pass the Patriot Act. Democrats raise the debt ceiling and spend, spend, spend. Republicans raise the debt ceiling and spend, spend, spend. Democrats give bailouts to corporations and businesses that are “too-big-to-fail.” Republicans give bailouts to corporations and businesses that are “too-big-to-fail.” Democrats support red flag gun confiscation laws. Republicans – yes, even President Trump – support red flag gun confiscation laws. Though there has been a slight hitch to this lock-step, Republican-Democrat thrust against America’s Faith, Families, and Freedom with the rise of Donald Trump and the millions of relatively conservative folks he has emboldened, things are still substantively the same as they have been for decades.

With this context in mind, let’s bring this back to Bernie Sanders and the Democrats. Bernie Sanders is formally an “independent” running in the Democratic primary. Since Bernie is an “independent” and currently leading in the polls, it’s fair to ask: What does he really stand for?

Bolshevik Bernie, as I’ve called him for years, is nothing more than a dyed-in-the-wool socialist. He’s Red from head to foot. He’s on record visiting and vocally supporting the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Bolshevik Bernie and his wife even honeymooned in Soviet Russia in 1988. Soviet Sanders was enamored with the pristine image – the Potemkin villages – of communist paradise he was shown in Moscow and surrounding cities. He apparently loved one Soviet paradise so much that he visited another Soviet outpost in 1989 – Fidel Castro’s Cuba – which he also praised.

Bolshevik Bernie hasn’t hidden from the fact that he’s a sincere socialist. Specifically, he subscribes to “democratic socialism.” Socialists always try to confuse the rest of us by using bogus labels and distinctions like “Democratic Socialism,” “Social Democracy,” “Fabian Socialism,” “Progressivism,” “liberalism,” “Marxism,” “Maoism,” “communism,” “Bolshevism,” and so forth, when in reality they all believe in the same basic principles outlined in The Communist Manifesto.

The leftist news outlet Vox described Bolshevik Bernie’s philosophy in these rosy terms:

““Democratic socialism” in Sanders’s definition is a species of social democratic populism that pits the American people against a corrupt elite class that must be defeated outright. This emphasis on class antagonism, on the perfidies of the elite and their threat to American democracy, is what defines Sanders’s vision.”

Let’s cut through the jargon and reinterpret this paragraph in normal language. Vox is saying that Democratic Socialism is a form of working-class “populism” with an “emphasis on class antagonism” aimed at the “elite” ruling class. In other words, Sanders believes in class warfare, as every other communist in existence does. He couches his call for class warfare in classic communist terms – the working class (i.e. proletariat) vs. the “corrupt elite” (i.e. bourgeoisie). And what is his goal, according to Vox? He wants to save “democracy.”

Perhaps it would interest folks to know that The Communist Manifesto states that “the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of democracy.” Communists everywhere always work for “democracy.” For instance, Article 1 of Red China’s constitution states: “The People’s Republic of China is a socialist state under the people’s democratic dictatorship led by the working class and based on the alliance of workers and peasants.” How is this different from Vox’s synopsis of Sanders’ “vision” for America?

Bernie Sanders17

Communists love to hoodwink people into thinking that they use the word “democracy” the same as most average people do; that is, to denote a government by the people and for the people. Instead, what Bernie and his fellow Reds mean when they say “democracy” is the “dictatorship of the proletariat.” Of course, what this means in reality is rule by a bureaucratic oligarchy claiming to speak for the people. In other words, domination by the state. Communism is the ultimate form of collectivized statism.

That Bolshevik Bernie is a communist is painfully obvious from proposals and statements he has made such as: “I favor the public ownership of utilities, banks and major industries.” Placing the “means of production” under control of the state is Marxism 101. What exactly does this socialist want to nationalize? I quote from a 2019 Washington Examiner article:

In the ideal America outlined by 2020 hopeful Bernie Sanders, the majority of the economy would be centralized and socialized.

Atop our existing government spending, comprising some 40% of GDP, the Vermont Senator wouldn’t just nationalize one-fifth of the economy with a “Medicare For all” bill eliminating private health insurance. Under his Green New Deal plan, he would also nationalize most of the energy sector.

At a mere $16.3 trillion, the Sanders plan would go beyond simply spending measures to increase climate-focused research and development. It would literally centralize the means of domestic energy production. . . .

. . . Between “Medicare For all” and the Green New Deal, Sanders is seriously calling for the outright nationalization of 30% to 40% of the American economy.”

True to socialist form, Bernie claims that collectivizing society and placing the economy under the dictatorial control of the federal government will actually help create jobs and grow the economy. All history refutes this idea, but that’s what socialists claim. Whether Bernie believes his own propaganda is irrelevant. What is relevant is what placing the economy under state control really means. It means that government would gain a monopoly. It means that you would be accountable to government rather than government being accountable to you. It means that a group of unelected bureaucrats would micromanage your life. Central planning and Freedom are not compatible.

Central planning is what the Green New Deal is all about. In my books A Century of Red and Red Gadiantons, I made the case that the “green” movement is really Red. Yes, radical environmentalism is a Soviet creation. It makes sense, then, that Bolshevik Bernie and Comrade Cortez (AOC), his protege, have openly peddled this plan. Let’s discuss the Green New Deal momentarily because it really shows where Bernie stands on principle.

The Green New Deal uses as its justification for existence the hysteria over “climate change.” Despite there being zero evidence that man causes global warming or substantively effects the world’s climate, those who want to collectivize all power in the hands of an international superstate have a vested interest in scaring you to death so you will renounce your reason and give up your sovereignty. But what you should be really scared of is their top-down socialist schemes to usurp your Liberty.

Bernie Sanders6

Among other absurd proposals, the Green New Deal has suggested that every building in America would have to be reconstructed to comply with environmentalist dictates. This impossible goal is part of the reason it is estimated that the Green New Deal would cost $93 Trillion. Yes, Trillion. I quote from from The Daily Signal about this socialist scheme’s projected impact on the economy:

Just how much change would the Green New Deal bring to the economy? Put simply, it would bring it to its knees.

We know, because when we tried to use the Energy Information Administration’s National Energy Model to assess how the plan would affect the economy, the model crashed. . . .

One thing is clear: to meet these goals, Washington would have to force all Americans to reduce their energy consumption and/or switch to “green” energy sources—and fast. And the only way to do that is to impose coercive taxes and regulations. . . .

Before the model’s lights went out, we found that a $300 per ton carbon tax and associated regulations would cost a family of four nearly $8,000 per year in income lost to higher energy costs, consumer prices, and foregone wages. The 20-year cost totals $165,000.

During that same 20-year period, the tax would siphon off an average of 1.1 million jobs per year and diminish gross domestic product by a total of more than $15 trillion.

That’s a hefty price to pay for getting barely halfway to the net-zero emissions goal. Is it worth it?”

I think anyone who hasn’t allowed their emotion to overrule their reason must conclude that allegedly “protecting the environment” is not worth putting ourselves and our posterity in economic bondage. Are you prepared to pay the thousands upon thousands of dollars in taxes that the plan would require? How would that stimulate the economy? It wouldn’t. But Bernie lives in such a fantasy world that he believes “a lot of people in the country would be delighted to pay more in taxes.” As the authors note, millions of jobs would be sacrificed on the altar of radical environmentalism. Another “delight,” surely.

Even the co-founder of Greenpeace has denounced the Green New Deal as a catastrophe in the making. I quote from The New American:

Bernie Sanders3

The “Green New Deal” proposed by congressional Democrats is a “recipe for mass suicide” and the “most ridiculous scenario I ever heard,” Greenpeace Co-Founder Patrick Moore . . . In fact, Dr. Moore warned that if the “completely preposterous” prescriptions in the scheme were actually implemented, Americans could be forced to turn to cannibalism to avoid starvation — and they still would not survive. Other experts such as Craig Rucker, the executive director of the environmental group Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), also sounded the alarm about the “green” proposal in Congress, comparing it to Soviet five-year plans and calling it a “prescription for disaster.””

Despite the absurdity of the Green New Deal and the fact that it would not only tank our economy, place Americans under an unheard of tax burden, and Sovietize our government, Bernie Sanders, at the present moment, has this on his website:

As president, Bernie Sanders will boldly embrace the moral imperative of addressing the climate crisis and act immediately to mobilize millions of people across the country in support of the Green New Deal. From the Oval Office to the streets, Bernie will generate the political will necessary for a wholesale transformation of our society, with support for frontline and vulnerable communities and massive investments in sustainable energy, energy efficiency, and a transformation of our transportation system.

We need a president who has the courage, the vision, and the record to face down the greed of fossil fuel executives and the billionaire class who stand in the way of climate action. We need a president who welcomes their hatred. Bernie will lead our country to enact the Green New Deal and bring the world together to defeat the existential threat of climate change.

As president, Bernie Sanders will launch the decade of the Green New Deal, a ten-year, nationwide mobilization centered around justice and equity during which climate change will be factored into virtually every area of policy, from immigration to trade to foreign policy and beyond.”

These openly communistic cries for the “transformation” of America and the “mobilization” of society against those “greedy” rich people are a minuscule part of a much longer diatribe of ignorance and anti-Americanism that ought to shock everyone. The mere fact that Sanders supports this abomination is reason enough why he ought never hold a position of public trust in America.

Using the same Marxist reasoning as above, Bolshevik Bernie has said the following:

We must recognize that in the 21st century, in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, economic rights are human rights. That is what I mean by democratic socialism.”

Bernie Sanders7

Isn’t it interesting that he sees his Democratic Socialism in economic terms? Marxists have always defined life in economic terms. The economic interpretation of history, society, and life is classic Marxism. The International Socialist Review once stated:

Karl Marx was the originator of the idea of the economic interpretation of history . . . Marx pointed out the fundamental character of economic changes in every phase of social life. His proposition was “that in every historical epoch, the prevailing mode of economic production and exchange, and the social organization necessarily following from it form the basis upon which is built up, and from which alone can be explained, the political and intellectual history of that epoch.””

By embracing the economic view of life and parroting Marxist slogans, Sanders puts himself squarely in the communist camp. America was not founded on economic theory, however. Yes, the free enterprise system – summed up by the great W. Cleon Skousen as the Freedom to try, the Freedom to buy, the Freedom to sell, the Freedom to fail – was a part of America’s rave success. However, it was not the foundation. The foundation was our forefathers’ Faith, Families, and Freedom. They demonstrated a “firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence,” embraced Christian values, trusted in the rule of law as opposed to the rule of autocrats or the state, valued the individual, divided power and rejected centralization, and protected the individual from government intervention in the details of his life.

Bolshevik Bernie’s bid for the presidency openly has the support of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA). To them, he is the only candidate who can properly push forward their agenda. In a January 27 piece, the CPUSA ironically lambasted the Democrat-led impeachment charade as an example of the inefficiency of our constitutional form of government. They whined that political power under the Constitution doesn’t come from the American People, but from our institutions – which is not true. Political power does emanate from the People, but it is expressed and safeguarded by our institutions rather than left to the whims of the mob or the arbitrary dictates of a limitless government. The CPUSA stated that they alone have stood for the “American working class” and that they should ride Bernie Sanders’ coattails into power:

The Communist Party USA has a proud tradition of the Popular Front, which united broad sections of the American people from all nations and all political parties. This unity, far from originating in a fretful defense of the establishment, was on the contrary motivated by the overwhelming popular roar of outrage: “Enough is Enough!” The American working class has nothing to gain from an impeachment that in no way advances their interests and indeed is aimed only at shoring up the rapidly decaying political establishment while more and more profits flow up to the oligarchs in Washington and line the pockets of their professional lickspittles. Their professional activists only grease the wheels of official ideology, wheels which the working-class movement consistently reveals to have long since gone off the rails.

Of all the forces facing down Trump, only one can truly be characterized as “popular.” The presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders is not just that of a progressive personality but the backbone of a broad and transformative popular movement led by the working class. Even more important than the advocacy of democratic and progressive policies, which, as we saw in 2008 and 2012, can indeed be praised and championed even by the most rank opportunists, is the extent to which he has thrown in his lot with the American people. Drawing from the American progressive tradition of abolitionism, populism, and socialism, anti-establishment working-class movements, from the Justice Democrats to resurgent union activism to American Descendants of Slavery, allied with Sanders and facing mutual hostilities from the establishment of both parties, are rising from the earth to challenge the dying American liberal institutions. No one understands this better than Sanders himself, whose very campaign slogan is “Not Me, Us!” and who constantly states in public that real changes in history were never won by one individual but rather through concerted popular struggle against the entrenched establishment. No wonder the political elites see “Russian” or “Chinese” influences everywhere, preferring to imagine themselves besieged by foreign powers rather than face down the American working masses who are now rearing their heads for the first time in half a century.

It is and has always been the stated mission of the Communist Party USA, however, to align itself directly and unreservedly with the American working masses, and to aid in the concentration and discipline of the nation’s progressive forces. To this end, the Party should not just campaign for Sanders but must fully immerse itself within the progressive and anti-establishment movement for which Sanders is the spokesman.”

Bernie Sanders18

Did you catch that? To the communists, their comrade Bernie Sanders is the “backbone” of the socialist Trojan Horse in America. Did you also notice that they called socialism an “American progressive tradition”? If socialism was the American tradition, then the Soviet Union, which Bernie Sanders loves, would not have called the United States their “main enemy.” It is only because we have engrafted socialist policies – the ten planks of The Communist Manifesto to be specific – that America has declined in greatness. And Bernie is the aging poster child for this hostile, alien movement.

The CPUSA voiced their support for Bolshevik Bernie in yet another article:

Defeating Trump and the ultra-right in 2020 means moving the electorate to the left. The most effective force doing that is the Sanders campaign, which we should become fully immersed in. Sanders has the most consistent and clear progressive, anti-monopoly program on a multitude of issues, including health care, taxation, workers’ rights, the environment, and foreign policy. That means he is a magnet for progressives working in all fields. He has made great improvements in his approach to the question of racism and has a growing base among young, progressive African Americans. Unlike any other candidate, he also raises the systemic question, defiantly rejecting appeals that he drop use of the word “socialism,” and calls additionally for a “political revolution,” meaning a grass-roots movement needed to enact and enforce his progressive agenda. Sanders is a social democrat and sees his agenda as confined within the capitalist system, but he is encouraging movement that would likely go further.”

Again, please note that the communists see Bernie Sanders’ socialist movement as “the most effective force” working for the transformation of the America into Soviet America – their decades’ old dream. Through lying Marxist slogans about “equality” and “rights,” Sanders has seduced blacks and other minorities into his fold. He is gaining “grass-roots” support by promising “free” stuff to everyone. Of course, anything you get for “free” has to be taken from someone else first. Yet, Sanders has a typically Bolshevik plan to appeal to emotion and get unthinking people to back him– blame the rich for everything and redistribute their wealth to his supporters. Truly, Sanders’ socialist “political revolution” is part and parcel of the broader agenda to plunge America into Marxist thralldom.

Finally, the CPUSA has opined that Sanders and his followers are helping move the country “left,” which will ultimately help them raise the Red flag over America. Writing back in 2017, they praised Bernie for helping spearhead the radicalization of America at a time when, because of Donald Trump and his “fascist” followers, it has never been more needed:

The anti-right fightback has brought into political life broad sections of the U.S. public. Trade union, civil rights, environmental, LGBTQ organizations have gained new strength, members and finances. This is no less true for the left and the Communist Party. In less that 3 months the party has gained more members than in 3 quarters of a typical year.

Indeed a deep and thoroughgoing radicalization process is taking place. . . .

It is a worldwide process driven at lightening speed by the internet, social networks and social media giving rise to revolutions, counter revolts, and unprecedented social change. . . .

It is process that’s given renewed meaning and life by the independent movement to elect our country’s first African American president, Occupy Wall street, the Dreamers, Black Lives Matter, marriage equality, and the political revolution energized by the Sanders bid for the presidency.”

Bernie Sanders’ campaign in 2020 is a fundamental part of the Communist Party’s strategy for the conquest of America. It is the communists who stand as the power behind the hostile movements breaking apart the foundation of our Republic. Look behind the feminist, LGBT, environmentalist, Fabian Socialist, and black revolutionary movements and you find die-hard communists.

Bernie Sanders5

Bolshevik Bernie’s political campaign is full of rabid communists. Earlier this month, Project Veritas released a secret video showing one of Bernie Sanders’ campaign managers, Kyle Jurek, praising the Soviet Union’s murderous GULAG, calling Donald Trump’s supporters “Nazis” who need to be reeducated, and threatening to initiate riots and burn cities if Bolshevik Bernie isn’t elected. I draw just two statements from Jurek. After saying that “gulags were a lot better than what the CIA has told us that they were” he also said, “If Bernie doesn’t get the nomination or it goes to a second round at the DNC convention, f**king Milwaukee will burn.”

Jurek is not the only violent communist revolutionary in Bernie’s corner, but his comments capture Sanders’ campaign perfectly. Though they might try to disguise it, Sanders and his allies are communists leading their blind followers to the slaughter. If earning the Communist Party USA’s endorsement doesn’t prove this, perhaps nothing will.

I feel to add one more point of interest to my article. Let’s never forget that Bernie is Jewish. I’ve labored hard for the past few years to get people to understand the verifiable historical reality that the overwhelming majority of early communist leaders were Jewish. Jews made up about 85% of the first Soviet government. By the 1930s, over one-third of Jews in the Evil Empire were working for the Soviet state apparatus. The infamous intelligence services, of which the KGB is the most well-known, were created and managed by Jews. The Soviet GULAG was almost exclusively run by Jews.

Lenin, according to the latest research, was part Jewish, married a Jewess, and spoke Yiddish at home. Trotsky was Jewish. Stalin married a Jewess and his top henchmen who planned and carried out the Holodomor and Red Terror were Jews. Karl Marx was a Jew. And many of the international financiers who bankrolled the Soviet rise, such as Warburgs, were Jews. Entire books have been written documenting the Jewishness of communism, but these few facts and the following quote by Winston Churchill will suffice for our purposes.

In 1920, Winston Churchill wrote the following in a public editorial titled “Zionism versus Bolshevism: A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People”:

The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution, by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews, it is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd) or of Krassin or Radek — all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combating Counter-Revolution has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses. The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people. Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing.”

communism833

The fact the Bernie Sanders, a Jewish-Marxist, is helping spearhead this hostile, anti-American, anti-Constitution movement in the United States, proves once more that we are dealing with the same enemy we’ve faced for a full century: Communism. If we are not acquainted with the communist conspiracy, and if we are not able to identify those behind it and who have been most instrumental in foisting it on us, we will never save our Republic. We cannot remedy a virus unless it is properly diagnosed. Satanic communism, with all of its occult, Freemasonic, and Zionist allies, is the Red Plague destroying the nations. Ronald Reagan said that communism is “the most dangerous enemy that has ever faced mankind.” He was right. And Bernie Sanders, the Jewish Bolshevik, is the face of this vicious movement in our day.

Despite the nightmarish vision of Bernie Sanders’ name on the ballot in November, I would welcome it for one major reason. If Bernie secures the Democratic Party nomination, it would prove to everyone once and for all that the Democratic Party is a communist front. True, the Communist Party endorsed Hillary Clinton in 2016, but she shied away from the name “socialist.” Bernie, however, embraces it. And if the Democrats embrace Bernie, they therefore embrace socialism.

A Bernie-Democrat campaign would rip the mask off of the Democratic Party in the eyes of the whole world. They would not be able to hide from the socialist label. How could they if their chosen candidate is an avowed socialist? Simply, a Bernie nomination would force everyone to choose a side. Will they side with socialism or real Americanism. Socialism is not the American tradition and no true American can ever be a socialist, for socialism is antithetical to every value that made America great.

If, through some hell-inspired catastrophe, Bernie Sanders actually won the Democratic nomination and then swindled his way into the White House, it would also prove beneficial to the nation in this sense: It would focus everyone’s mind once and for all on the real enemy – socialism. People would get a full dose of the tiny spoonful of what they were fed by Obama. They would see, in living color, what socialism does to a nation. They would feel it in their pocket books, in the press, at school, at the grocery store, in social interactions. The nation would finally see what those of us who study the subject see – the Red tentacles wrapping around Lady Liberty. They would then be given the ultimate opportunity to show their true colors and to decide what type of nation they really want – a free Republic or a socialist paradise.

To close, I repeat: I hope Bernie Sanders wins the Democratic nomination. No, I don’t wish him well in November, but I do hope he gives the nation a chance to see that they are besieged by rabid socialists who hate them, who think they’re “Nazis” who need to be reeducated in a GULAG, and who threaten them with violence if they don’t get their way (and slavery if they get it). Know your enemy. Learn his tactics. Understand how he lies, promises the world, and manipulates emotion to gain followers. And if you learn nothing else, learn that communism must die for America to survive!

Zack Strong,

January 31, 2020

Bernie Sanders10

Principles of the Declaration of Independence

The Declaration of Independence is America’s first formal law. It is a binding legal document. It is an official pronouncement by the first leaders of our Republic. Not only did the Declaration announce America’s Independence to the world and list our forefathers’ grievances against the British monarchists, but it set forth the basic principles that our confederated Republic is founded upon. It is incumbent upon Americans who value their Freedom, as well as their history, to study this remarkable document. Consider this article a lesson in some of the essential principles of the Declaration.

Declaration7

We will discuss two principles of paramount significance: 1) The truth that our rights come from God; and 2) the reality that political power springs from the People and exists for the purpose of securing their God-given rights.

Perhaps the most prominent principle of the Declaration of Independence is its affirmation that an individual’s rights come from God and cannot justly be taken from him or curtailed. In its first paragraph, the Declaration refers to “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” It elaborates in these terms:

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.”

Nature’s God, the Creator of the world, the Lord Jesus Christ, is the source of our “unalienable Rights.” They do not come from man. They do not come from a collective consensus. And they do not come from government. They are not invented by legislative bodies, granted at the pleasure of a president or king, or voted upon. Our rights come from God alone. Alexander Hamilton put it this way:

The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power” (Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, February, 1775).

In 1772, Samuel Adams, often referred to as the Father of the Revolution, wrote a document titled “The Rights of the Colonists in which he expounded the very principles we are discussing today:

Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature. . . .

The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule. . . .

In short, it is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one, or any number of men, at the entering into society, to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights; when the grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution, is for the support, protection, and defence of those very rights; the principal of which, as is before observed, are Life, Liberty, and Property. If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave.”

America194

Each individual, upon birth, inherits his or her Liberty. Freedom is our birthright! It is the gift of Almighty God. It is an innate endowment and an essential factor in our life’s mission here on earth. This Freedom cannot be justly taken away or limited unless one has forfeited it through their infringement of the equal rights of others. The masterful Thomas Jefferson explained:

[R]ightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will, within the limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’; because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual” (Thomas Jefferson to Isaac Tiffany, April 4, 1819).

Only our own misuse of our Liberty can allow it to be taken from us by just laws rightly administered. Unless we violate the “equal rights of others,” the law has no hold on us. Any law that violates our individual rights is, by definition, tyrannical.

Our rights – life, Liberty, the ownership and control of private property, self-defense, privacy, due process, habeas corpus, free speech, discrimination/association, and so forth – come from God Almighty. They are, as Thomas Jefferson wrote in the first draft of the Declaration of Independence, “sacred and undeniable.” Please always remember that your rights are God-given, that they are sacred, and that no just government can deny you your exercise of them.

The second great principle we can glean from the Declaration is that all political power rests in individuals. This power is granted by the People (that is, individuals working together voluntarily) for the specific purpose of protecting their rights. The People has no right nor authority unless an individual has the same right and authority. Working in concert does not suddenly increase authority or negate justice. For instance, if an individual cannot take money from his neighbor and give it to another person, then neither can the group take money (e.g. taxes) from members of the population and give it to others (e.g. welfare, federal education aid, foreign aid). The American People has just as much political power as the weakest individual in society has and no more.

After explaining that our precious rights come from God, the Declaration explains that “to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” What’s more, the Declaration makes it clear that “whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends [i.e. defending individual rights], it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

America203

The purpose of government is to secure our life, Liberty, and property. Frederic Bastiat, writing in his classic text The Law, explained man’s essential rights, the purpose of law and government, and how collective rights are derived only from individual rights:

We hold from God the gift which includes all others. This gift is life — physical, intellectual, and moral life. . . .

Life, faculties, production — in other words, individuality, liberty, property — this is man. And in spite of the cunning of artful political leaders, these three gifts from God precede all human legislation, and are superior to it. Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.

What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.

Each of us has a natural right — from God — to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties? If every person has the right to defend even by force — his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right — its reason for existing, its lawfulness — is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups. . . .

If this is true, then nothing can be more evident than this: The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all.”

When a government exceeds its authority and ceases to fulfill its enumerated purposes, it is not only the right of the People “to alter or to abolish it,” it is a duty. Again, the Declaration informs us:

[M]ankind 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.”

It is our duty, my fellow freeman, to throw off the shackles of tyranny when evil men slap them on our wrists. And make no mistake – a pattern of tyranny, such as we’ve seen in the United States for decades under both Republican and Democratic administrations, is a clear sign that there is a “design” to “reduce [us] under absolute Despotism.” That is to say, when we see a “long train of abuses,” we know for a surety that they are not mere mistakes or miscalculations, but that there is a conspiracy at work to enslave us.

Two years before he wrote the Declaration, the Sage of Monticello penned a lesser-known document entitled “A Summary View of the Rights of British America.” In it, he succinctly explained:

Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate and systematical plan of reducing us to slavery.”

America197

We see so many examples of concerted attacks on our Liberty that only one totally uninformed or maliciously complicit can deny them. Republicans and Democrats alike are angling to destroy the Second Amendment’s guarantee of our right of self-defense, violate what little privacy and due process we have left, micromanage what we can and cannot say and publish, steal the remaining wealth they haven’t already stolen, and spill American blood in unconstitutional foreign wars in which we have little to no legitimate interest. When we see this “long train of abuses,” it is our sacred duty to overturn the corrupt laws, oust the oath-breakers, and “provide new Guards” who will honor their oaths to uphold the Constitution and secure our God-given rights.

Never tolerate the violation of your rights by harboring the misguided idea that we owe blind obedience to government at all times and in all things. We do not. We owe obedience only to God, the Constitution as properly interpreted, and just laws that are made in pursuance of the Constitution. Our obedience to these, George Washington said, is “sacredly obligatory upon alland is “the duty of every individual.” However, arbitrary and despotic government merits no allegiance. “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). Rather, we have a right and a duty to alter or abolish such tyranny and to support a government that secures our rights.

I turn again to the first great principle of the Declaration of Independence; namely, that our rights come from God. It is only by obedience to His divine laws, and through faith on the name of Jesus Christ, that a People can escape the destruction of their Liberty. While we must step forward to safeguard our Freedom, rescue the Constitution, and resist tyranny and conspiratorial machinations, the ultimate remedy for our ailing society is repentance. We must repent, turn our hearts to Christ, and become a righteous and virtuous People once more.

The Holy Bible makes these timeless promises to peoples which serve the Lord:

Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord(Pslam 33:12).

If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land” (2 Chronicles 7:14).

Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil. . . .

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. . . .

And I will restore thy judges as at the first, and thy counsellors as at the beginning: afterward thou shalt be called, The city of righteousness, the faithful city” (Isaiah 1:16, 18, 26).

George Washington2

We must turn to God like our forefathers did. Those extraordinary patriots did not recklessly stumble into the War for Independence. They humbly bowed themselves before their Creator, petitioning Him for strength, and then went to work, having faith that their Lord would be with them and would preserve them in their just struggle. In his memorable speech, Patrick Henry proclaimed:

[W]e are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. . . .

. . . I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

Surely, the Lord was with our ancestors in their bid for Independence. He presided over their conflict and gave them the victory. God is the true Founding Father of America. At the height of the fighting, General Washington was awed by God’s intervention on America’s behalf and stated:

The hand of Providence has been so conspicuous in all this, that he must be worse than an infidel that lacks faith, and more than wicked, that has not gratitude enough to acknowledge his obligations” (George Washington to Thomas Nelson, August 20, 1778).

The Declaration of Independence concludes with a similar statement of faith to Washington’s and Henry’s. Patriots everywhere know and cherish these iconic words:

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.”

If we love our Liberty, then we will follow our patriot-fathers’ example. We will repent, turn to Christ, and walk uprightly. We will honor God’s laws and the principles of the Constitution. We will zealously guard our rights and ensure that our representatives honor their oaths of office and are punished when they do not. If we are freemen, we must act like freemen.

The time is at hand when neutrality is no longer an option. You must choose a side. Stand with your countrymen who are doing their utmost to defend our Faith, Families, and Freedom. Stand with constitutionalists trying to preserve the supreme law of the land and our distinct Americanist system. And fight the good fight at all times, in all ways, and in all places. I close with words from the Father of our Country. Let them echo in your ears and in your hearts from this day forward. God help us restore our Republic!

The time is now near at hand which must probably determine whether Americans are to be freemen or slaves; whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their houses and farms are to be pillaged and destroyed, and themselves consigned to a state of wretchedness from which no human efforts will deliver them. The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army. Our cruel and unrelenting enemy leaves us only the choice of brave resistance, or the most abject submission. We have, therefore, to resolve to conquer or die” (George Washington, address to the Continental Army before the Battle of Long Island, August 27, 1776).

Zack Strong,

January 20, 2020

America220

Virginia Showdown

The eyes of the nation are fixed on Virginia. The newly-elected Democrats have been busy trying to ram tyrannical gun control down Virginians’ throats. Governor Ralph Northam is fully on board with their efforts and has disgraced the governorship of his great state in so doing. This article will explain the unfolding crisis and why it is significant even for those of us not living in Virginia.

guns97

The current anti-gun bills that have just cleared the Virginia Senate are: Senate Bill (SB) 35, which will create additional gun-free zones and prohibit citizens from carrying firearms at public events requiring permits; SB 69, which prohibits the purchase of more than one firearm per 30 day period; and SB 70, which will severely restrict the sale and transfer of private firearms and require additional background checks and licenses. Other draconian bills, such as SB 240, which would institute a Leninist red flag gun confiscation order, have been tabled for the time being.

Virginia is going so far off the deep end that they are even pondering a bill that would charge individuals with a felony for “unlawful paramilitary activity.” If you do any of the following, it would be considered “unlawful”:

“1) Teaches or demonstrates to any other person the use, application, or making of any firearm, explosive or incendiary device, or technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, knowing or having reason to know or intending that such training will be employed for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder; or

“2) Assembles with one or more persons for the purpose of training with, practicing with, or being instructed in the use of any firearm, explosive or incendiary device, or technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, intending to employ such training for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder.”

In other words, the despotic bill could effectively prohibit formal firearms training and private militias. No doubt our Founding Fathers, who fired the first shots of the War for Independence because the British were attempting to confiscate their firearms at Lexington and Concord, would recoil and oppose such a measure.

When this gaggle of anti-gun bills was first making its way down the pipe, Governor Northam made national news when a Democratic colleague suggested he call out the Virginia National Guard to enforce the unconstitutional laws. Let’s address this point for a moment. First, the governor of a state absolutely does have authority to call out the National Guard to enforce state laws. That’s not the issue. The issue is that the laws that would be enforced are unconstitutional and, thus, void and invalid.

The supremacy clause of the Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2, plainly states:

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

Constitution10

This means that the Constitution trumps state law. It trumps Supreme Court rulings. It even trumps Congressional laws and executive orders if those are not in harmony with constitutional principles. Let’s look at how this applies in our present situation.

The relevant part of the Second Amendment states that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” If a law – state, local, federal, it makes no difference – infringes upon the individual’s right to keep and bear arms, that law is, by the default pronouncement of the Constitution, null and void! That is, it is an unconstitutional and, therefore, unenforceable, law. All officers of government throughout the country are “bound” by the Constitution and must obey it.

Oaths are important. It is not a trivial matter to swear to one’s Maker and before the American People. Anyone swearing an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution, which military personnel, congressmen, the president, National Guardsmen, and others do, would be in direct violation of that oath were they to enforce unconstitutional, gun-grabbing, Liberty-destroying, property-stealing laws like SB 35, SB 70, SB 69, and SB 240. There is simply no debate on the subject – a freeman has the duty to disobey tyrannical, unconstitutional laws. This the Constitution requires.

Benjamin Franklin’s motto, which he proposed for the motto of the United States, was: “Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.” This was a general maxim at the time of America’s founding. Everyone believed that they not only had a right, but a duty, to resist and oppose tyrants. And what is a tyrant? Webster’s 1828 dictionary defines tyranny as:

“Arbitrary or despotic exercise of power; the exercise of power over subjects and others with a rigor not authorized by law or justice, or not requisite for the purposes of government. Hence tyranny is often synonymous with cruelty and oppression.”

Since the Second Amendment to the Constitution plainly guarantees that the individual’s right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed,” and the Constitution binds everyone in a position of public trust to support only laws in harmony with its principles and directives, it follows that anyone promoting unconstitutional laws is, by very definition, a tyrant. Governor Northam and the mob of Democrats in the Virginia Legislature are tyrants. Perhaps they would do well to recall that the flag of the great state of Virginia proudly displays the words: Sic Semper Tyrannis; or, in popular expression, Death to Tyrants.

Sic Semper Tyrannis6

The public reaction to the Democrats’ hostile legislation and the governor’s threats has been heated. Many Virginians are livid. Over 100 cities and counties in the state have passed resolutions declaring themselves sanctuary counties for guns. Sheriffs have gone on record stating flatly that they will disobey any anti-gun law or gun confiscation order. Sheriff Scott Jenkins of Culpeper County, for instance, has taken a firm stand and stated bluntly:

“My office will always encourage and support our citizens in firearms training, concealed carry permits, and the ability to defend themselves and their families. I remain very optimistic that our General Assembly will not pass the proposed bills. Obviously, if passed, there are many of us willing to challenge these laws through the courts. In addition, if necessary, I plan to properly screen and deputize thousands of our law-abiding citizens to protect their constitutional right to own firearms.”

Stories have circulated that Tazewell County is forming their own militia to resist gun control. This isn’t precisely accurate, though it is in the ballpark. Tazewell County Administrator Eric Young explained:

“We are not forming a militia. Our intent is to provide all of our residents the opportunity to own weapons, learn basic survival skills, and learn basic military discipline, if they are interested in doing so. In the unlikely event we were to need a militia, we would have a population which would include people with weapons and those skills.”

Everywhere you look in Virginia, anger is rising. As these tyrannical bills lurch closer to becoming law (albeit unconstitutional law), the free citizens of Virginia are gearing up for a fight. A pro-gun, pro-Freedom rally is scheduled to meet at the capital in Richmond on January 20. So paranoid is Governor Northam that he has declared a state of emergency and banned all guns from the premises. The tyrannical order was protested by the besieged Virginians, but an activist court allowed it nonetheless.

While thousands of patriots are projected to attend Monday’s rally to protest the assault on their rights, hordes of anti-Freedom activists are also vowing to attend. For instance, the Marxist rabble known as Antifa are planning to attend in order to stir up and provoke violence. A quick word about Antifa. Antifa is a domestic terrorist organization founded by Jewish Marxists nearly ninety years ago. I quote from the Cleveland Jewish News:

“In 1934, Milwaukee police arrested three leftists who infiltrated a pro-Nazi meeting and began scuffling with supporters of Hitler. The leftists were part of a group of several hundred anti-fascists who entered the meeting, broke it up and pelted the keynote speaker with rotten eggs. The melee ended only after 100 police arrived to restore order.

communism785

“Today’s antifa (an abbreviation of “anti-fascist action”) sees itself as the ideological descendant of activists like these. Anti-fascist brawlers — many of them communists, socialists or anarchists — began organizing in the 1920s and ’30s.”

Antifa and those who cover for them label anyone opposed to communism as “Nazis,” “fascists,” and “white supremacists.” In truth, those who oppose the Antifa/Marxist agenda are Freedom-loving patriots. Antifa thugs were the ones who initiated the much publicized violence in Charlottseville, Virginia, among other places. They, not the alleged “white supremacists” and “Nazis,” were the ones responsible for the carnage there. And it will be they, not the Virginian patriots, who will be guilty of causing violence should there be any in Richmond.

It is interesting to note that yesterday I discovered YouTube has begun censoring my Liberty Wolf podcast just as Facebook has for censoring my work for years. YouTube recently deleted episode #17, which exposes Antifa for the domestic terrorists they are, for “hate speech.” Yes, “hate speech” is what they call truth. Truth is to communists as the cross is to vampires. And I find the timing curious. At the time that Antifa Marxist thugs are planning to shake things up in Virginia, my podcast calling them out for their violent terrorist activities is silenced. Coincidence?

There is a nation-wide effort to pin the blame for violence and civil disturbances on normal, everyday American patriots – especially those of us who are white. There are many forces, including the media, which are behind this effort. I mention only two: The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

The ADL is one of the most vile, tyrannical, and maniacally savage organizations in the country. It is in its own right a domestic terrorist organization. The ADL is linked with Israeli intelligence and is little more than a wing of the Israeli regime. It is also part and parcel of the Jewish Masonic sect B’nai B’rith. If one word characterizes its activities, it is, ironically, defamation. They defame patriots, constitutionalists, white folks, and anyone who opposes the Marxist-Zionist agenda. Here’s the ludicrous spin the ADL is spewing about the Virginia situation:

“White supremacists, meanwhile, are using the event to further their own violent agenda and to spread hatred of Jews and other minorities. In a post that was shared by numerous white supremacist and accelerationist channels, a user alleged that the Jews now control the state of Virginia, and that they are leading the push to “confiscate ‘assault weapons.’”

“Conspiracy theories and false information campaigns are further exacerbating tensions in Virginia. The most pervasive conspiracy theory on social media is the notion that Virginia’s Democrats intend to confiscate firearms, despite Gov. Northam’s and other Democratic lawmakers’ consistent reassurances they have no plan to do so. Another popular theory suggests the United Nations is somehow involved in Virginia’s gun debate, a conspiracy theory linked to far-right fears regarding a “globalist” takeover of the U.S.

“These conspiracy theories, however outlandish, can have real world implications. If people believe that Jews are behind efforts to confiscate firearms, then it is more likely that malicious actors will threaten or attack Jewish targets. Similarly, if people believe that the rally will be targeted by groups such as Antifa and that they might have to fight, then they are more likely to react violently to events on the ground.”

ADL6

In the ADL’s eyes, anyone who shows up to protest the Democrats’ oppressive anti-gun laws is a “white supremacist,” a “conspiracy theorist,” and, probably, an “anti-Semite.” This is the type of narrative they’ve been pushing for eons. They want everyone to think that constitutionalists and pro-gun patriots are out-of-touch, racist, anti-Semitic Nazis on the verge of violence. The reality is that we who oppose the ADL’s defamation and their radical anti-Constitution, anti-Liberty agenda are in touch with reality.

For instance, it is not a “conspiracy theory” to say that Jews support gun control. In 2017, Rabbi Eric Yoffie wrote an editorial in the Israeli publication Haaretz titled “U.S. Jews Support Gun Control, but the Political Debate Ignores It.” Speaking in the context of the Aurora, Colorado shooting, Rabbi Yoffie stated:

“And almost immediately, liberals, some Democrats, Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City, and even a very few mainstream Republicans demanded to know why laws have not been passed to keep guns out of the hands of those who commit these outrageous crimes.

“And Jews were cheering them on.

“Americans in general may be divided about gun control, but Jewish Americans are not. They have always been among the most enthusiastic advocates of legislation that will regulate gun ownership in a reasonable way. At the Million Mom March a dozen years ago, the largest gun-control demonstration in American history, Jews attended in droves.

“This is because most Jews are still Democrats, and gun control is more of a Democrat issue than a Republican one; this is because Jews are an overwhelmingly urban people who lack a culture of hunting and gun ownership; and this is because the NRA is associated in the minds of many Jews with extremist positions that frighten Jews and from which they instinctively recoil.”

gun control12

Again, I ask, is it a “conspiracy theory” to say that Jews constitute one of the major blocs pushing the anti-gun agenda? Hardly! Is it wrong to point out that the most hardcore anti-gunners in the nation – Bloomberg, Feinstein, Schumer, et al. – are Jews? Not at all. In fact, it is dishonest to deny this important link.

Yet, to the ADL, truth is dangerous. They don’t want Americans to know the truth. Instead, they want us to be scared to criticize a Jew for any reason. They want us to be terrified of being branded with the “Nazi” stigma. Yet, patriots need to man up and realize that these false labels don’t matter. If you’re branded as a “Nazi,” “fascist,” “Klansman,” or “white supremacist,” for standing up for Liberty and Americanism, so what? Wear it as a badge of honor and know that you’re getting under the ADL’s exceedingly thin skin.

The second anti-Freedom organization I will mention is the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). In an absurd article titled “Conspiracy Theories, Threats of Violence Loom Over Coming Gun Rally in Richmond,” which is part of their “Hate Watch” campaign, the Marxist SPLC opined:

“Gun-rights activists and antigovernment extremists are planning a protest in Richmond, Virginia, on Monday fueled by antigovernment conspiracy theories and accompanied by online calls for violence. . . .

“Gov. Ralph Northam also declared a state of emergency before the expected protest.

““We’re seeing threats of violence,” Northam said Tuesday at a news conference. “We’re seeing threats of armed confrontation and assault on our Capitol.”

“Those threats of violence have been rampant among antigovernment and far-right groups online. The Virginia Militia, a Facebook group that shares antigovernment memes, posted a paid Facebook advertisement featuring a gallows and three hanging nooses. Beneath the photo is the caption “Government Repair Kit.” . . . .

“On Telegram, the event is being lauded by a subset of white nationalists and neo-Nazis that have enthusiastically endorsed violence and terrorism as a means to their political ends. One channel has posted the names of Jewish lawmakers in Virginia who have spoken out in favor of stronger gun regulations. The Justice Department said Thursday that three men were taken into custody by the FBI amid an investigation into the white nationalist group The Base. . . .

“The event is underpinned by antigovernment conspiracy theories.”

SPLC2

Apparently SB 35, SB 69, and SB 70 are all “conspiracy theories.” Apparently there is no agenda (SB 240) to confiscate guns – it’s all just a hateful “conspiracy theory” pushed by “neo-Nazis” and “white nationalists.” Ladies and gentlemen, can you see how their false narrative goes? Can you see how they push their lies? Can you see the type of baseless smears they use to vilify their opposition? Surely you can see that their real agenda is to demonize white people, patriots, and anti-Marxists so that they can proceed to destroy our national Freedom as guaranteed by the Constitution.

It is clear that neither the ADL terrorist group nor the SPLC Marxist radicals have never looked at the Virginian flag which proclaims Sic Semper Tyrannis. “Death to tyrants” it not a threat – it is a duty. Tyrants have forfeited their right to life by attempting to destroy the lives, by demolishing the Liberty, of the people who put them into their positions of trust in the first place. In doing so, they mark themselves as enemies of the Republic and as tyrants in the fullest meaning of the definition.

Let the words of John Adams be imprinted on your heart – and let them stand as a warning to tyrants in every part of the Republic:

“The right of a nation to kill a tyrant, in cases of necessity, can no more be doubted, than that to hang a robber, or kill a flea. But killing one tyrant only makes way for a worse, unless the people have sense, spirit, and honesty enough to establish and support a constitution guarded at all points against tyranny; against the tyranny of the one, the few, and the many. Let it be the study, therefore, of lawgivers and philosophers, to enlighten the people’s understandings and improve their morals, by good and general education; to enable them to comprehend the scheme of government, and to know upon what points their liberties depend; to dissipate those vulgar prejudices and popular superstitions that oppose themselves to good government; and to teach them that obedience to the laws is as indispensable in them as in lords and kings” (John Adams, “Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States,” 1787).

It is the right of the American People, which includes the good people of Virginia, “to kill a tyrant.” I don’t suggest they storm the Richmond Capitol and lynch the governor. I don’t recommend violent self-defense at this stage. But I am stating a true principle. The people may hang a traitor and tyrant from the highest gallows if he attempts, as Governor Northam and his Democrat cohorts are attempting, to destroy their rights vouchsafed by the Constitution.

Sic Semper Tyrannis7

Virginians, like Americans everywhere, only owe obedience to God and to the supreme law of the land, which is the Constitution. Their obedience is to principle, not party; ideas, not individuals; the Constitution, not the collective whim. They owe zero obedience to the wild dictates of a president, the activist opinions of a court, or the tyrannical laws of a congress or state legislature.

Indeed, Virginians would be violating George Washington’s maxim that the Constitution is “sacredly obligatory upon all” if they were to disobey that sacred document and allow a hostile law, calculated to destroy the Second Amendment and infringe on the rights of the people to defend themselves, to go into effect. To allow evil is evil. To allow tyranny to proceed without protest is to be complicit in the destruction of Liberty. To be silent in the face of hostility is to stand guilty of aiding and abetting it.

For Virginians to allow their state to ramrod gun control down their throats is not only embarrassing, but anti-American. It flies in the face of Virginia’s noble traditional of fighting for Freedom. Good Virginians like Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, James Madison, Stonewall Jackson, and Robert E. Lee are surely rolling in their graves as they watch their state be reduced to slavery.

The showdown in Virginia is important to Americans in every corner of the Republic because of a principle Thomas Paine once articulated:

“He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself” (Thomas Paine, Dissertation on First-Principles of Government, 32).

If we watch the Virginia regime strip the right of self-defense away from its people and merely shrug and go about our lives, will we then have a right to protest when it happens in our state? If we sit silently now, won’t it be hypocritical to speak up when the gun-control overlords seek to steal your Liberty’s teeth? Simply put, if the Constitution can be violated in Virginia, it can be violated in Montana, Idaho, Utah, or Wyoming. None of us is safe when another state can defy the Constitution at will and curtail the rights of its people.

When the War for Independence broke out against the British monarchist invaders and their ruthless mercenaries, Americans from the thirteen states rushed to the aid of their oppressed brothers wherever they needed assistance. Doubtless there will be people from many states in Richmond next Monday. God bless them for taking a stand for Freedom! And may God give you the strength, wherever you are, to raise your voice in defense of our besieged Virginian countrymen.

guns103

I end with a statement from the Virginia Citizens Defense League which is hosting the upcoming rally and with my own plea for American patriots to rise in defense of the Constitution:

“There have been many rumors, videos, and articles flying around the internet. We cannot stress enough that this is a peaceful day to address our Legislature. Yes, we hold a rally, but the point of the day is communication with our Representatives. To our knowledge there are no credible threats of violence. That being said, please practice appropriate situational awareness. IF YOU SEE A BAD ACTOR flag down a police officer and point it out. If someone tries to provoke you, smile and walk away. There is probably someone secretly recording the interaction, with the intent of capturing some kind of inappropriate reaction on your part. Don’t take the bait. It’s not worth the bad press. The eyes of the nation and the world are on Virginia and VCDL right now and we must show them that gun owners are not the problem. Lead by example. . . .

“Thank you all for your support. For those coming from other states to stand with Virginia, we appreciate you making the long trip. This will be a notable day in history. Let’s all work together to keep it positive and to achieve our goal of protecting our right to keep and bear arms.”

Zack Strong,
January 18, 2020

Russia – Bastion of Traditionalism?

Cultural Marxism is at the root of the chaos we see in the world today. Feminism and LGBT mania, for instance, are communist front movements. The entire spectrum of anti-traditional trends has been promoted by the communist conspiracy since day one. Russia picked up the Marxist-feminist standard with the advent of Bolshevism and has carried it ever since. The purpose of today’s article is to obliterate the prevalent notion that Russia is a family-friendly “bastion of traditionalism” and share the truth that Russia is the true home of modern feminism.

feminism12

I can’t express how dismayed I am every time I see a self-proclaimed traditionalist, or a fellow Christian, refer to Russia in glowing terms. In “trad” social media groups and on traditionalist pages and websites, I routinely encounter people parroting Moscow’s propaganda about how “traditional” Russia is, how “feminine” the women are, how Russia is a “bastion of masculinity,” how there is a Christian “revival” occurring, and how wonderful Vladimir Putin is. Each and every point just mentioned flies in the face of the facts and is an inversion of reality.

I will focus primarily on the first three of the five points listed. Before discussing the first item, perhaps we should address we mean by “traditionalism.” Apart from the obvious definition that traditionalism means upholding tradition, regardless of what that tradition is, the sense in which the word is used today is defined by Google as “the theory that all moral and religious truth comes from divine revelation passed on by tradition, human reason being incapable of attaining it.”

This is an accurate enough definition, though in popular parlance it usually refers to culture and families. Traditionalism is a culture. It is a mentality and philosophy. It is a way of life. Those who live a “traditional” life are those who embrace marriage, create families, are sexually upright, reject degeneracy, and are generally conservative and modest in manners, dress, appearance, and behavior. Traditionalism is heavily linked – I would argue inexorably linked – to Christian values and Christian views on marriage, family, and morality.

With this in mind, is Russia a “bastion of traditionalism”? That is, does Russia, as a society, embrace the traditional or Christian perspective of marriage, family, sexual purity, modesty, and upright behavior? Any honest examination of the reality on the ground – and I have seen that reality firsthand as I lived in Russia for two years and spent my days talking with average folks and meeting inside their homes – must conclude that Russia is not a traditional society.

Let’s analyze a few statistics and points of history. We must remember that Russia was conquered by the alien Bolshevik forces in 1917. The first communist regime was approximately 85% Jewish. That is, it was virulently anti-Christian and devoid of morals. Christian chapels were looted and then literally demolished. Priests were shot. Nuns were raped. And Orthodox cathedrals all across Russia were converted into “Museums of Atheism,” complete with pagan statues and blatantly anti-Christ exhibits. This had the effect of hardening the people and they remain hardhearted towards religion in general to this day, only attending church on holidays to gawk and take pictures at the astonishingly fanatical and theatrical displays of Orthodox priests.

communism759

The rhyming caption reads: “Religion is Poison. Protect Children.” It shows the Christian woman as an old, oppressive hag thwarting the child’s progression and desire to go to school by trying to force an outdated religion on her.

One of the Soviets’ first orders of business was to abolish church marriage and institute in its place civil marriage. In fact, they desired to abolish marriage altogether and began by replacing religious marriages with civil unions and figured the institution would “wither away” of its own accord. Some Communist Party members even performed “red marriages” in mockery of traditional Christian marriage.

The institution of marriage was and is viewed by the Marxists as inherently oppressive. They see marriage as slavery. It was in The Communist Manifesto that these enemies of humanity had threatened the “abolition of the family” throughout the world. In harmony with this evil design, the Reds began destroying marriage in Russia. In 1925, a Soviet publication in boasted:

Already the Soviet power has freed [marriage] from any superfluous shackles, has eliminated from it all religious and ecclesiastical survivals. . . . Marriage in Soviet legislation has ceased to be a prison” (Harold J. Berman, “Soviet Family Law in the Light of Russian History and Marxist Theory,” Yale Law Journal, Vol. 56, Issue 1, 36, 1946).

Indeed, the communists made marriage an irrelevant and unnecessary formality of social life. Not just marriage, but the family as a whole was also targeted. After effecting their coup, the Bolsheviks set to work rewriting the Russian Family Code. Soviet Russia became the first nation to institute no-fault divorce. Divorce became so absurdly easy that you could actually send your spouse a letter in the mail saying “we’re divorced” and it was legally binding. In this sort of culture, marriage lost its sacred stature and divorce became the norm. They legalized abortion-on-demand and even subsidized it. And they did their best to collectivize children and make sure they were raised out of the home and in public schools where they could be indoctrinated in Marxist thought.

Russia Beyond gives us a glimpse into the Soviet attack on traditionalism. In his article “How sexual revolution exploded (and imploded) across 1920s Russia,” Alexander Rodchenko wrote:

““On the abolition of marriage” and “On civil partnership, children and ownership” were among the first decrees of the Soviets in 1918. Church weddings were abolished, civil partnership introduced. Divorce was a matter of choice. Abortions were legalized. All of that implied a total liberation of family and sexual relations. This heralded the beginning of the raunchiest epoch in recent Russian history.

A relaxed attitude to nudism was a vivid sign of the times: on the bank of the Moskva river, near the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour [which Stalin later blew up and replaced with the world’s largest swimming pool], a nude beach formed, the likes of which Western Europe could not have dreamed of at the time. . . .

communism787

Rape by 1920s has become an epidemic. Quite strikingly, sexual violence towards former noble and bourgeois women was for a time even considered “class justice” among the proletarian males. Meanwhile, up to 20 percent of Russia’s male population had carried sexually-transmitted diseases . . . New laws on marriage and the overall atmosphere of breaking with the past encouraged promiscuity and casual approach to sex, unthinkable just years ago.

Soviet society was breeding a dangerous generation of homeless orphans – official reports indicate that, by 1923, half of the children born in Moscow had been conceived out of wedlock, and many of them were abandoned in infancy.”

Yes, the Marxist sexual revolution was in full swing in Russia before most in the West had even contemplated it. It make havoc of families and homes and left, as you have seen and will see, a trail of societal desolation, broken hearts, and destroyed individuals in its wake – just as it was designed to do.

One of the best analyses of the family during this dark era of history is found in Paul Kengor’s superb book Takedown. I excise several choice paragraphs and share them with you:

The disciples of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were committed to a revolution in family life, to a radical rupture in traditional relations between husband and wife and parents and children. Their first and most ardent practitioners, the Bolsheviks, followed the new faith with reckless abandon. . . .

The Russian Orthodox Church’s long-standing prohibition against divorce was lifted by the Bolsheviks, leading to an explosion in divorce rates and utter havoc upon the Russian family. The dramatic combined effect of an immediate full liberalization of divorce laws and institution of “red weddings” became especially acute with the corresponding complete legalization of abortion in 1920, which was an unprecedented action anywhere in the world at the time. With those changes and the squashing of the Russian Orthodox Church and its guidance in marriage and families and children and education and more, Lenin and his allies dealt a severe blow to marital and family life in traditionally religious Russia. Right out of the gate, within the first months and years after they seized power, the Bolsheviks had initiated these jolts to society. . . . .

In the Soviet Union and other subsequent communist countries that followed suit, the effect on marriage and the family was nothing short of catastrophic. The divorce rate skyrocketed to levels unseen inhuman history. In short order, it seemed as though everyone in Moscow had a divorce. One Russian man, painfully recalling his boyhood years from the late 1920s, stated, “The years 1929 to 1932 were the unhappiest period for my family. At that time there were many cases of divorce. Many of our acquaintances got divorced. It was like an epidemic.”

The numbers grew worse decade by decade. As one study reported in the 1960s, “it is not unusual” to meet Soviet men and women who had been married and divorced upwards of fifteen times.

The world certainly took notice of this domestic carnage. It looked to outsiders as if these communists really were looking to abolish marriage. In fact, it is instructive that the influential American magazine the Atlantic published a 1926 piece with the title “The Russian Effort to Abolish Marriage.”

If divorce was an epidemic in the USSR, abortion was a black plague.

The Bolsheviks legalized abortion shortly after they seized power. Like divorce, it was a rare area where the communists allowed for individual freedom. Here they enacted full privatization. So long as the family went up in flames, it seemed, the communists would eagerly allow full and free private ownership of gasoline and matches – with no rationing. You weren’t free to own a farm or factory or business or bank account or go to church or print your own newspaper, but if you wanted a divorce or abortion, the sky was the limit in Bolshevik Russia.

Having overthrown the ship of state and murdered the entire Romanov family in July 1918 – a fitting symbol to the coming war on the family – Vladimir Lenin made good on his June 1913 promise for an “unconditional annulment of all laws against abortions.” By 1920, abortion was fully and legally available and provided free of charge to Russian women. The number of abortions skyrocketed.

communism802

By 1934 Moscow women were having three abortions for every live birth, shocking ratios that American women, in the worst, wildest throes of Roe v. Wade, never approached. The toll was so staggering that an appalled Joseph Stalin, the mass murderer, actually banned abortion in 1936, fearing a vanishing populace. . . .

. . . A more progressive Nikita Khrushchev put things back in order in 1955, reversing Stalin’s abortion ban (and ramping up religious persecution), thus allowing rates to ascend to heights heretofore unwitnessed in human history. One authoritative source from the late 1960s reported, “One can find Soviet women who have had twenty abortions.”

By the 1970s, the Soviet Union was averaging 7 to 8 million abortions per year, annihilating whole future generations of Russian children. (America, with a similar population, averaged nearer 1.5 million abortions per year after Roe was approved in 1973.)” (Paul Kengor, Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Family and Marriage, 32-35).

Let’s build on this information with a few more quotations. The next statements come from the 1926 article Kengor mentioned titled “The Russian Effort to Abolish Marriage.” It informs us:

The question whether marriage as an institution should be abolished is now being debated all over Russia with a violence and depth of passion unknown since the turbulent early days of the Revolution. . . .

One must live in Russia to-day, amid the atmosphere of torment, disgust, and disillusionment that pervades sex relations, the chaos, uncertainty, and tragedy that hover over the Russian family, to understand the reasons for this heated discussion, for these passionate pros and cons.

When the Bolsheviki came into power in 1917 they regarded the family, like every other ‘bourgeois’ institution, with fierce hatred, and set out with a will to destroy it. ‘To clear the family out of the accumulated dust of the ages we had to give it a good shakeup, and we did,’ declared Madame Smidovich, a leading Communist and active participant in the recent discussion. So one of the first decrees of the Soviet Government abolished the term ‘illegitimate children.’ This was done simply by equalizing the legal status of all children, whether born in wedlock or out of it. . . .

At the same time a law was passed which made divorce a matter of a few minutes, to be obtained at the request of either partner in a marriage. Chaos was the result. Men took to changing wives with the same zest which they displayed in the consumption of the recently restored forty-per-cent vodka.

communism799

Street children in Stalin’s USSR

Some men have twenty wives, living a week with one, a month with another,’ asserted an indignant woman delegate during the sessions of the Tzik. ‘They have children with all of them, and these children are thrown on the street for lack of support! (There are three hundred thousand bezprizorni or shelterless children in Russia to-day, who are literally turned out on the streets. They are one of the greatest social dangers of the present time, because they are developing into professional criminals. More than half of them are drug addicts and sex perverts. It is claimed by many Communists that the break-up of the family is responsible for a large percentage of these children.)

The peasant villages have perhaps suffered most from this revolution in sex relations. An epidemic of marriages and divorces broke out in the country districts. Peasants with a respectable married life of forty years and more behind them suddenly decided to leave their wives and remarry. Peasant boys looked upon marriage as an exciting game and changed wives with the change of seasons. It was not an unusual occurrence for a boy of twenty to have had three or four wives, or for a girl of the same age to have had three or four abortions.”

This is only a snippet. I encourage you to read the full article at this link. I urge you to comprehend that communism brought about the destruction of the family in Russia – and that the wreckage can be seen everywhere today. And we need not try to divorce feminism from communism, for it was the Bolshevik revolutionary Inessa Armand (who also had an affair with Lenin) who proudly boasted:

If women’s liberation is unthinkable without communism, then communism is unthinkable without women’s liberation.”

Suffice it to say that Soviet Russia obliterated the family unit and destroyed the institution of marriage. Human life was made cheap and infanticide reached mind-boggling proportions. Marriage lost its significance and divorce became something everyone did. Even homosexuality and transgenderism flourished in the early days of the Soviet Union, with one Russian writer commenting that “members of the gay community were incredibly brave – some wore women’s dresses and corsets, wore their hair long and often looked like real women.”

communism803

Those who think the West introduced feminism and LGBT madness to Russia need to get their story straight – it was the other way around. We are just starting to really deal with those problems that have plagued Russia for over a century. The Bolsheviks deliberately exported these feminist ideas everywhere they could – particularly to the West – with the deliberate intention of weakening us so that we would succumb to their world revolution. It was the Jewish-Marxist radical Willi Munzenberg, of Frankfurt School fame, who is quoted as saying: “We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks.” Sadly, their efforts have nearly succeeded – though thankfully our culture doesn’t yet stink as badly as Russian culture.

This is the awful legacy and crumbling foundation modern Russia is working from. While you can perhaps say today’s Russia is an improvement, the difference is negligible. Despite the carefully-concocted propaganda, Russian society has yet to break free from Soviet norms and is still further advanced down the road of cultural Marxism than the United States. Russian women still abort far more of their babies than their American counterparts and have a lower birth rate. And Russia has a staggering 60% divorce rate – the highest in the world. Russian homes are in tatters and their culture remains hostile to the traditional family. In no sense whatsoever can Russia be considered a “bastion of traditionalism.”

Let’s now move on to the second point. How feminine are Russian women? And do they really reject “Western” feminism as we so frequently hear? Sadly, the answer is no, they’re not particularly feminine and they don’t reject feminism. I’m convinced that most people believe Russian women are feminine because a good many Russian women are exceptionally attractive and, outwardly, dress in skirts and heels and always do up their face and hair. But is this what real femininity is?

Wikipedia defines femininity as “a set of attributes, behaviors, and roles generally associated with women and girls.” According to this definition, you might be able to get away with calling women “feminine” if you really stretch it. But when we couch this in terms of traditionalism, the attempt falls flat. Remember, part of being traditional is being modest and moral. Russian women are not modest. Trust me on this one. Russian women are in the habit of wearing very short skirts, revealing attire, and overdoing it on makeup and accessories. They spend an exorbitant amount of their money on cosmetics, furs, and fancy clothes and shoes.

And what about behavior? Part of being feminine is to act ladylike and fulfill womanly duties like motherhood. 65% of Russian women work – a substantially higher percentage than in the United States. That’s not terribly feminine. Why aren’t these “feminine” women at home with their children? Perhaps one reason they’re in the workplace instead of in the home is that they don’t have a family. Remember, 60% of Russian marriages end in divorce. Also, the birthrate in Russia is pitifully low and even lower than the U.S. birthrate at 1.75 children per family. Again, this behavior is not very feminine.

Furthermore, Russian women are bossy – like Western feminists. They’re often shrill – again, just like Western feminists. Frankly, they push the men around and I’ve seen them be both physically and verbally abusive. They also drink, do drugs, and sleep around at a higher rate than Western women (though, fortunately, alcohol consumption is decreasing). Russia has one of the most rapidly rising AIDS/HIV epidemics in the world due in large part to the rampant sexual immorality. Can women who break the Lord’s law of chastity honestly be considered feminine?

Russia5

Russians in general engage in many behaviors that are repugnant to most Americans, such as public urination and defecation (though San Francisco, Commiefornia apparently sees nothing wrong with this). It’s a real problem. I watched mothers teaching their young boys to pee on the road and in the streets – not in emergency situations, but as a matter of course. I’ve even seen grown women squatting on the side of the road doing their business as people walked by. Fortunately, American women haven’t yet followed that trend.

Prostitution and public indecency are also massive problems in Russia. I’ve never seen so many prostitutes in one place in my life as I did in Russia. You’d see them selling their bodies on the side of the road as their handlers waited in a dirty van behind them. Then, down the road, their mafia oversees sat in cars monitoring police radios so they could warn their girls to run if the cops were on their way. I witnessed this phenomenon on more than one occasion. It’s remarkable how fast some women can run in high heels. I guess, as Vladimir Putin said, Russia has the best hookers.

As for pornography, the “new drug” that is scourging the world, I saw men and women both looking at pornographic magazines and videos while riding on trains or public transport. Billboards could also be a tad too salacious at times and you’d see far too much skin whenever you saw people sunbathing or swimming. If you visited the markets (the same ones where ripped-off American products or cheap knockoffs of everything imaginable proliferated), you had to be careful where you looked.

It’s sad that the sex-industrial complex is so well-established that we have detailed analytics on porn usage by country, region, state, gender, device type, day of the week, search category, and so forth, but we do. According to the data, Russia ranks 12th in global traffic to the world’s largest online porn site and their top search category is “Russian.” And there are a lot of Russian porn stars to search considering that Russia ranks #2 in the world (behind, tragically, our own country) in contributing female “actresses” to pornographic films (five of the top ten porn-star-contributing nations are Russia and four of its “former” Soviet satellites).

Russia9

In short, Russian women are gripped by feminism without even realizing it. No, they don’t consider themselves feminist – but neither do American women if statistics are to be believed. Yet, the feminist culture dominates. It is exhibited in habits and thought patterns. Russian women, like women in the West at the present time, are conditioned to believe that they are “liberated” by being single and sexually debauched, “free” when they murder their offspring, and “fulfilled” when they work. They are not submissive ladies and are in fact more willing to walk all over you, hit you, curse you out, cheat on you, or divorce you than American women are. Simply, don’t buy the hype about the “feminine” Russian woman.

The third and final point on our list I will cover only briefly. There is a myth circulating on the internet, perpetuated largely by Marxist-controlled Hollywood, that Russian men are masculine and strong. Sorry to burst the bubble, but this is laughably untrue. The Hollywood image of a tall, broad, muscular man with a great big beard is the polar opposite of reality in today’s Russia. Most Russian men are short, scrawny, and look as if they’ve been on a concentration camp diet. On a daily basis, I’d shake hands with people I met with on the streets. And on a daily basis Russian men audibly gasped and winced when I shook their hands. For the most part, they had a limp-wristed grip. A handshake really does tell you a lot about a person.

In 2007, I participated in a three-on-three basketball tournament in the small city of Ramenskoye to the south of Moscow. One of the opposing teams had a player from the Russian national basketball team on it. When we played them, I guarded the professional player. I held him scoreless and usually out-rebounded him even though he was one of the few Russians I ever met who was taller than me (I’m almost 6’1” and at the time I had lost thirty pounds and weighed only 160 lbs.). He was frustrated and thought I played too rough. I played against Russians in basketball, soccer, tackle football, and gatorball and in each case Russian men and boys wined about how physical Americans played (I’ve read that pro players from other countries almost universally observe the same thing when they come to America to play). In truth, they were simply unfit wimps. Physically, the average Russian man is a pitiful specimen.

Russia10

Hollywood is not reality

Naturally, there’s more to masculinity and character than physicality. A real man should be chivalrous, gentlemanly, courteous, polite, hard-working, a protector of women, have an upright character, be totally loyal to his wife and marriage covenants, and so forth. When this is applied to Russian men, however, they fail again. Russian men are, as a whole, drunkards. They also use a large amount of drugs.

In the city of Mytishchi where I lived for a time, you’d see drug needles littering the streets and our church building happened to be located in what people called “the drug area” (which was also home to numerous prostitutes and mafia groups). Russian SWAT routinely raided our neighbor’s property looking for drugs. In some cities, it was common to see Russians walking down the road with alcohol in one hand and a cigarette in the other. More times than I can count I’ve seen Russian men passed out in the street, peeing on themselves in public, convulsing from drugs in a corner alley, or dancing lewdly and making fools of themselves in front of everyone. The constant smell of cigarette smoke hanging in the air really completed the atmosphere.

Additionally, Russian men brawl and fight, curse and quarrel. It was routine to see men walking or staggering down the street covered in blood from either fighting or falling down drunk and bashing their face. The number of Russian men with missing or broken teeth was also astonishing – again, largely from brawling or drunkenness. And the number of Russian men who had been to prison – as evidenced by their tattoos – was also staggering.

As noted, Russian men get pushed around by their women (that is, when they’re not committing rape and murder at high rates). And why wouldn’t they? Russia is a feminist country – the first feminist country. It is a bastion of feminism and yet they don’t even realize it. Russian men (and, sadly, many Western men) see their raucous and dangerous behavior as some sort of masculinity. But it’s not real masculinity; it’s juvenile and crass. Drunkenness, fighting, prolific swearing (when I learned the various forms of the f-word in Russian, I was shocked at how commonplace their usage was), sexual unchastity, violent criminality, and physical unfitness do not a masculine nation make.

When you really look at the whole picture, Russia is not the “bastion of traditionalism” that propagandists and those who have been taken in by propaganda claim. I wish Russia was a bastion of Faith, Families, and Freedom. This is my wish for my own country and for every nation on earth. I yearn for the day when evil will be swept away, when the communist cancer will be eradicated, when feminism will die its natural death, when corruption and war are terminated, when sanity will prevail once more, when the Gospel of Jesus Christ sinks deep into every heart, and when Freedom will prevail.

feminism2

Sadly, we are not there yet and won’t be until the Lord returns in His glory. Until then, Russia stands as an enemy to the human race. The notion that “communism is dead” and “the USSR collapsed” is one of the most devastatingly effective ruses ever pulled on the world. The reality is that the Soviets faked their demise and communism never died. Indeed, the communist conspiracy is more powerful and prevalent than ever before. Russia, China, and their allies are in a strategically advantageous position over the West and the final clash draws closer despite Washington’s boast of strength and stability. You will live to see Russia and China strike the United States and initiate world war. Mark my words.

One final word is in order. You have doubtless noted the contempt in my tone. Let me make it clear that my contempt is for the Russian government and for the communist regime that so thoroughly demoralized and beat down the Russian people. I don’t hate the Russian people – I pity them. They are a product of communism – victims of the most wicked conspiracy ever created. I pity them and pray for them.

Here is the reality: Russia today is the America of tomorrow unless we root out the communist cancer among us. Russia is not following the West, as I so often hear, but we are following them – and to our detriment. From no-fault-divorce to civil marriages to abortion-on-demand to massive drunkenness to feminist women and emasculated men, Russia set the example and blazed the trail. And yet, still, there remain some fantastic individuals, including the most humble man I’ve ever met in my life – a spiritual giant from Ukraine who settled in Moscow who call Russia home.

I mentioned that I lived in Russia for two years. I was there as a missionary for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – one of the few foreign proselytizing churches that hasn’t been banned and kicked out by Putin’s regime (though Putin recently signed laws that severely restrict our ability to do the Lord’s work). I walked the streets speaking with Russians about their core beliefs, about their aspirations, and about their families. I met with them in their homes and churches. I visited the cities and villages. These people told me their life stories. They shared their beliefs about God. And some of them became lasting friends. I was even, for a short while after I returned home, engaged to a Russian gal.

My point is that I don’t hate the Russians. I love them and spent many nights on my knees praying for them. I do, however, hate communism. I hate the Russian regime that rules in Moscow and despise the KGB conspirator named Vladimir Putin who rules in the Kremlin and pretends he’s a Christian and traditionalist, despite his well-publicized affairs and broken marriage, so that the gullible will sympathize with and support Russia as some sort of world “savior.” Don’t fall for it.

One day, I firmly believe, though it will probably come only after a day of fire and cataclysm, Russia will throw off her shackles and become the Christian nation too many people wrongly believe she is now. The blood of Israel runs in their veins, as it does in the veins of most Caucasian peoples, and they have a glorious future. They will be gathered in by the Lord, but the time is not yet. At present, a communist pseudo-tsar rules in Moscow. Russia’s unparalleled stockpile of nuclear and biological weapons stands ready to be used to bring about the one-world order and one-world religion dreamed of by the global Elite. If we continue to allow the cultural Marxism imported into our nation by the Bolsheviks to infect us, we will be weak enough for the Elite to carry out their pre-planned strike.

It was this article’s purpose to wave the smelling salts under your nose to awaken you from the mental fantasy that Russia is a “bastion of traditionalism” and the hope of the world. Russia is, in truth, the home of feminism and the world leader in cultural degradation. The West is the way it is because we have followed Russia’s example. If we seek to reverse the trends, we need to stop listening to Russian propaganda and those who buy into it and instead cling to the traditions, values, and institutions that made Western Christian civilization great.

communism247

As Americans, we must rush forward to defend our Faith, Families, and Freedom against Marxist machinations whether promoted by Washington, Moscow, Tel Aviv, London, or Beijing. Our only hope is in turning to the Lord Jesus Christ and in rejecting all anti-Christ philosophies. If we seek traditionalism, we must look for it here at home – not on the Red steppes of Russia.

Zack Strong,

January 16, 2020

The Book of Mormon Speaks of Christ

Many people have heard of The Book of Mormon, but most do not know what it is or what it says. At best, most folks have heard negative rumors about it from their pastor, the internet, or popular culture. Yet, they have never taken the time to study its words and learn for themselves what it says. As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I maintain that The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ is an inspired book of scripture to be read alongside the Bible. It is a holy book that speaks of Jesus Christ and encourages us to look to Him alone for salvation. I devote this article to bearing my personal testimony of The Book of Mormon’s witness of Jesus Christ.

Jesus155

Before discussing The Book of Mormon, let’s talk about the Bible. What is the Bible? The name “Bible” comes from the Latin word biblia, and its Greek counterpart, meaning “the books.” It is a collection of writings by inspired prophets and apostles throughout the ages of time. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, often called “Mormons,” believe that the Bible is God’s word and that it testifies of our Savior Jesus Christ.

In 2007, President M. Russell Ballard, one of the ranking leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, gave a talk titled “The Miracle of the Holy Bible.” He cleared up some of the misconceptions about our beliefs when he explained:

It is a miracle that we have the Bible’s powerful doctrine, principles, poetry, and stories. But most of all, it is a wonderful miracle that we have the account of the life, ministry, and words of Jesus, which was protected through the Dark Ages and through the conflicts of countless generations so that we may have it today.

It is a miracle that the Bible literally contains within its pages the converting, healing Spirit of Christ, which has turned men’s hearts for centuries, leading them to pray, to choose right paths, and to search to find their Savior.

The Holy Bible is well named. It is holy because it teaches truth, holy because it warms us with its spirit, holy because it teaches us to know God and understand His dealings with men, and holy because it testifies throughout its pages of the Lord Jesus Christ. . . .

How grateful we should be for the Holy Bible. In it we learn not only of the life and teachings and doctrines of Christ, we learn of His Church and of His priesthood and of the organization which He established and named the Church of Jesus Christ in those former days. We believe in that Church, and we believe that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that same Church, restored to earth, complete, with the same organization and the same priesthood.

Bible1

Without the Bible, we would not know of His Church then, nor would we have the fulness of His gospel now.

I love the Bible, its teachings, its lessons, and its spirit. I love the Old Testament’s compelling, profound stories and its great prophets testifying of the coming of Christ. I love the New Testament’s apostolic travels and miracles and the letters of Paul. Most of all, I love its eyewitness accounts of the words and the example and the Atonement of our Savior Jesus Christ. I love the perspective and peace that come from reading the Bible.

Brothers and sisters, I am sure many of you have had the experience of hearing people say that “Mormons are not Christians because they have their own Bible, the Book of Mormon.” To anyone harboring this misconception, we say that we believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as our Savior and the author of our salvation and that we believe, revere, and love the Holy Bible. We do have additional sacred scripture, including the Book of Mormon, but it supports the Bible, never substituting for it. . . .

Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe that “all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable” (2 Timothy 3:16). We love the Bible and other scriptures. That may be surprising to some who may not be aware of our belief in the Bible as the revealed word of God. It is one of the pillars of our faith, a powerful witness of the Savior and of Christ’s ongoing influence in the lives of those who worship and follow Him.” (President M. Russell Ballard, “The Miracle of the Holy Bible,” General Conference, April, 2007).

The Bible is, above all else, an inspired witness of the divinity and mission of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Redeemer of the world. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe in and witness of Jesus Christ and, therefore, also believe in, read, and testify of the Bible. No one should ever hold the misconception that we are not Christians or that we don’t cherish the Bible. The very name of our Church proclaims to the world that we believe in Jesus Christ!

Latter-day Saints earnestly believe in the Bible’s prophecies. For instance, we take it seriously when Amos declared: “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets” (Amos 3:7). This clearly shows the need for prophets and continuing revelation. This is further bolstered by other Biblical passages that we hold dear; namely, Paul’s statements that “God hath set . . . in the church” both “apostles” and “prophets” (1 Corinthians 12:28) and that the Lord’s Church is “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets” (Ephesians 2:20).

prophet6

Where are the Christian denominations today claiming prophets and apostles as both the Old and New Testaments obviously require? If you believe the Bible is the word of God, you must also believe that the Lord calls men as prophets and apostles, organizes them according to a very specific format and structure (Ephesians 4:11-16; Matthew 16:18-19; Luke 6:13; Luke 10:1; Acts 1:24-25), and that He leads them through revelation suited to their situation.

We testify that the Lord has given mankind prophets once again in our day, beginning in 1820 with Joseph Smith whom I testify was a true prophet in the mode of Moses, Elijah, Peter, Abraham, and the others. If it is true that “Jesus Christ [is] the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever” (Hebrews 13:8) as the Apostle Paul taught, then we should look for Him to direct his Church today through prophets as He did anciently. For Bible-believing Christians, there’s simply no dismissing the well-established principle of the Lord’s people receiving revelation through prophets called by Him.

We proclaim to the world that the Lord is good, that He loves all people everywhere, and that He graciously reveals His word to people throughout the earth whenever they are receptive enough to receive it. Whereas the Bible is a record of God’s dealings with the House of Israel in the Old World, The Book of Mormon is a record of God’s dealings with two peoples, including Israelites, who inhabited the ancient American continent.

These two civilizations were blessed with prophets who taught the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The first group, the Jaredites, left the Old World at the time the Lord confounded the languages at the Tower of Babel. They were led by prophets to the American continent where they established an ancient Christian society. Over time, they devolved into wickedness, murdered the prophets, and harbored Satanic secret societies which led the people into a civil war that ended in their total annihilation. Around the time of their tragic fall, the Lord brought another people into this land – the Nephites.

The majority of The Book of Mormon concerns the Nephites and their usually hostile brothers, the Lamanites. The Nephites were Israelites of the tribe of Manasseh. They were named after Nephi, the son of a Hebrew prophet named Lehi. Lehi, a lineal descendant of Joseph of Egypt, preached in Jerusalem at the same time the great prophet Jeremiah was preaching – that is, around 600 B.C. The Israelites at Jerusalem rejected Jeremiah’s words and threw him into prison. Jeremiah received a revelation in which the Lord attested to the fact that He had sent many prophets to Israel:

Since the day that your fathers came forth out of the land of Egypt unto this day I have even sent unto you all my servants the prophets, daily rising up early and sending them:

Yet they hearkened not unto me, nor inclined their ear, but hardened their neck: they did worse than their fathers” (Jeremiah 7:25).

prophet5

The Hebrews not only rejected Jeremiah, they also rejected Lehi’s warnings and sought to kill him. The Lord warned Lehi to flee out of the land and subsequently led his family into the Americas through Nephi’s instrumentality.

Nephi was a humble man who became a great prophet of the Lord. He spent his life teaching his people about Jesus Christ and prophesying that He would come to redeem all who would believe on His name. Nephi wrote: “[M]y soul delighteth in proving unto my people the truth of the coming of Christ” (2 Nephi 11:4). Nephi particularly loved citing the words of Isaiah which also foretold of the coming Messiah and many of his writings were explanations of Isaiah’s earlier prophecies.

Nephi bore frequent and powerful testimony of the Savior Jesus Christ. He once stated:

I say unto you, that as these things are true, and as the Lord God liveth, there is none other name given under heaven save it be this Jesus Christ, of which I have spoken, whereby man can be saved. . . .

For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do. . . .

And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins. . . .

. . . the right way is to believe in Christ and deny him not; for by denying him ye also deny the prophets and the law.

And now behold, I say unto you that the right way is to believe in Christ, and deny him not; and Christ is the Holy One of Israel; wherefore ye must bow down before him, and worship him with all your might, mind, and strength, and your whole soul; and if ye do this ye shall in nowise be cast out” (2 Nephi 25:20, 23, 25, 28-29).

Nephi was emphatic – we are saved by Christ! His is the only name through which salvation comes. It is His grace that rescues us from sin. We are to talk, preach, and prophesy of Him and teach our children to look to Him. Nephi believed in the Son of God and He wanted us to also “bow down before him” in humble discipleship.

Jesus157

Another time, Nephi taught:

And as I spake concerning the convincing of the Jews, that Jesus is the very Christ, it must needs be that the Gentiles be convinced also that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God;

And that he manifesteth himself unto all those who believe in him, by the power of the Holy Ghost; yea, unto every nation, kindred, tongue, and people, working mighty miracles, signs, and wonders, among the children of men according to their faith” (2 Nephi 26:12-13).

In what is perhaps my favorite declaration from The Book of Mormon, Nephi issued this challenge to all who would read his words:

And I know that the Lord God will consecrate my prayers for the gain of my people. And the words which I have written in weakness will be made strong unto them; for it persuadeth them to do good; it maketh known unto them of their fathers; and it speaketh of Jesus, and persuadeth them to believe in him, and to endure to the end, which is life eternal. . . .

. . . be reconciled unto Christ, and enter into the narrow gate, and walk in the strait path which leads to life, and continue in the path until the end of the day of probation.

And now, my beloved brethren, and also Jews, and all ye ends of the earth, hearken unto these words and believe in Christ; and if ye believe not in these words believe in Christ. And if ye shall believe in Christ ye will believe in these words, for they are the words of Christ, and he hath given them unto me; and they teach all men that they should do good.

And if they are not the words of Christ, judge ye – for Christ will show unto you, with power and great glory, that they are his words, at the last day; and you and I shall stand face to face before his bar; and ye shall know that I have been commanded of him to write these things” (2 Nephi 31:4, 9-11).

Nephi was not the only ancient American seer to speak of Christ. All the prophets recorded in The Book of Mormon record taught of Jesus and encouraged all to have faith in Him. Jacob, Nephi’s younger brother, gave us these words:

And we also had many revelations, and the spirit of much prophecy; wherefore, we knew of Christ and his kingdom, which should come.

Wherefore we labored diligently among our people, that we might persuade them to come unto Christ, and partake of the goodness of God, that they might enter into his rest. . . .

Wherefore, we would to God that we could persuade all men not to rebel against God, to provoke him to anger, but that all men would believe in Christ” (Jacob 1:7-8).

Jesus91

Jacob loved to teach about the most important moment to ever play out on earth – the Atonement of Jesus Christ. The Atonement of Jesus Christ includes not only His suffering for our sins in Gethsemane and His crucifixion on the cross, but His resurrection and conquest of death and hell. Because of the Lord’s resurrection and Atonement, we, too, will rise from the grave and receive resurrected and immortal bodies before the Judgment Day. In a rousing sermon, Jacob taught of these great truths and the central role the Savior’s Atonement plays:

Yea, I know that ye know that in the body he [Jesus] shall show himself unto those at Jerusalem, from whence we came . . . for it behooveth the great Creator that he suffereth himself to become subject unto man in the flesh, and die for all men, that all men might become subject unto him.

For as death hath passed upon all men, to fulfil the merciful plan of the great Creator, there must needs be a power of resurrection, and the resurrection must needs come unto man by reason of the fall; and the fall came by reason of transgression; and because man became fallen they were cut off from the presence of the Lord.

Wherefore, it must needs be an infinite atonement. . . .

O the wisdom of God, his mercy and grace! For behold, if the flesh should rise no more our spirits must become subject to that angel who fell from before the presence of the Eternal God, and became the devil, to rise no more. . . .

O how great the goodness of our God, who prepareth a way for our escape from the grasp of this awful monster; yea, that monster, death and hell. . . .

And because of the way of deliverance of our God, the Holy One of Israel, this death, of which I have spoken, which is the temporal, shall deliver up its dead; which death is the grave. . . .

And it shall come to pass that when all men shall have passed from this first death unto life, insomuch as they have become immortal, they must appear before the judgment-seat of the Holy One of Israel; and then cometh the judgment. . . .

. . . behold, the righteous, the saints of the Holy One of Israel, they who have believed in the Holy One of Israel, they who have endured the crosses of the world, and despised the shame of it, they shall inherit the kingdom of God, which was prepared for them from the foundation of the world, and their joy shall be full forever. . . .

And he cometh into the world that he may save all men if they will hearken unto his voice; for behold, he suffereth the pains of all men, yea, the pains of every living creature, both men, women, and children, who belong to the family of Adam.

And he suffereth this that the resurrection might pass upon all men, that all might stand before h im at the great and judgment day.

And he commandeth all men that they must repent, and be baptized in his name, having perfect faith in the Holy One of Israel, or they cannot be saved in the kingdom of God. . . .

O then, my beloved brethren, come unto the Lord, the Holy One. Remember that his paths are righteous. Behold, the way for man is narrow, but it lieth in a straight course before him, and the keeper of the gate is the Holy One of Israel; and he employeth no servant there; and there is none other way save it be by the gate; for he cannot be deceived, for the Lord God is his name.

And whoso knocketh, to him will he open” (2 Nephi 9:5-8, 10-11, 15, 18, 21-23, 41-42).

Jesus120

The Atonement of Jesus Christ is the central feature of His Gospel. Everything else is a mere appendage to that glorious event. All men, no matter how wicked or flawed, will be resurrected because of the Lord’s mercy. Those who receive greater reward, however, will be those who, having the opportunity, embraced the doctrines of the Lord, believed on the name of Jesus Christ, entered into His covenants via the straight and narrow path, and endured to the end of their mortal lives in faithfulness.

These truths are taught many times and in many ways throughout the entirety of The Book of Mormon. Lehi, Nephi’s and Jacob’s father, gave this witness of the Redeemer:

Wherefore, redemption cometh in and through the Holy Messiah; for he is full of grace and truth.

Behold, he offereth himself a sacrifice for sin, to answer the ends of the law, unto all those who have a broken heart and a contrite spirit. . . .

Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.

And the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. And because that they are redeemed from the fall they have become free forever, knowing good from evil; to act for themselves and not to be acted upon. . . .

Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh . . . And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself” (2 Nephi 2:6-7, 25-27).

Hundreds of years after Lehi, Nephi, and Jacob, a king named Benjamin delivered a sermon which shows how thoroughly and inexorably Christian The Book of Mormon is. After having been instructed by an angel, he taught his people these glorious truths about the Messiah’s life and ministry:

[The Lord] shall come down from heaven among the children of men, and shall dwell in a tabernacle of clay, and shall go forth amongst men, working mighty miracles, such as healing the sick, raising the dead, causing the lame to walk, the blind to receive their sight, and the deaf to hear, and curing all manner of diseases.

And he shall cast out devils, or the evil spirits which dwell in the hearts of the children of men.

And lo, he shall suffer temptations, and pain of body, hunger, thirst, and fatigue, even more than man can suffer, except it be unto death; for behold, blood cometh from every pore, so great shall be his anguish for the wickedness and the abominations of his people.

And he shall be called Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Father of heaven and earth, the Creator of all things from the beginning; and his mother shall be called Mary.

And lo, he cometh unto his own, that salvation might come unto the children of men even through faith on his name; and even after all this they shall consider him a man, and say that he hath a devil, and shall scourge him, and shall crucify him.

And he shall rise the third day from the dead; and behold, he standeth to judge the world. . . .

For behold, and also his blood atoneth for the sins of those who have fallen by the transgression of Adam, who have died not knowing the will of God concerning them, or who have ignorantly sinned.

But wo, wo unto him who knoweth that he rebelleth against God! For salvation cometh to none such except it be through repentance and faith on the Lord Jesus Christ” (Mosiah 3:5-12).

Jesus102

What a marvelous testimony of Christ! King Benjamin was emphatic – salvation is only in Christ. Only by faith on His name, repentance, and obedience to His commands can we be saved. Saving those who trust in His name is the Lord’s eternal purpose. It is the reason He suffered so much agony. He loved us and therefore He laid down His life for us that we, through “faith on the Lord Jesus Christ,” can be saved.

Later still in the book’s timeline, a missionary named Amulek could be found teaching the same doctrine of Christ. In one instance, he explained the Savior’s impending Atonement and mankind’s future Resurrection:

And he shall come into the world to redeem his people; and he shall take upon him the transgressions of those who believe on his name; and these are they that shall have eternal life, and salvation cometh to none else. . . .

The spirit and the body shall be reunited again in its perfect form; both limb and joint shall be restored to its proper frame, even as we now are at this time; and we shall be brought to stand before God, knowing even as we know now, and have a bright recollection of all our guilt.

Now, this restoration shall come to all, both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, both the wicked and the righteous; and even there shall not so much as a hair of their heads be lost; but every thing shall be restored to its perfect frame, as it is now, or in the body, and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit” (Alma 11:40, 43-44).

Another time, Amulek shared this sweet testimony:

Christ shall come among the children of men, to take upon him the transgressions of his people, and . . . he shall atone for the sins of the world. . . .

And behold, this is the whole meaning of the law [of Moses], every whit pointing to that great and last sacrifice; and that great and last sacrifice will be the Son of God, yea, infinite and eternal.

And thus he shall bring salvation to all those who shall believe on his name; this being the intent of this last sacrifice, to bring about the bowels of mercy, which overpowereth justice, and bringeth about means unto men that they may have faith unto repentance.

And thus mercy can satisfy the demands of justice, and encircles them in the arms of safety. . . .

. . . now is the time and the day of your salvation; and therefore, if ye will repent and harden not your hearts, immediately shall the great plan of redemption be brought about unto you” (Alma 34:8, 14-16, 31).

All who believe in Jesus Christ can call unto Him and immediately begin their path to Him and Heavenly Father. His mercy can cover our sins, rescue us from the grasp of hell, and fully redeem us. We simply have to have faith in the Savior and bring our lives into harmony with His Gospel.

Perhaps even more powerfully than Amulek, Alma, the Nephite prophet in Amulek’s day, conveyed the magnitude and scope of the Atonement of Jesus Christ. He taught that the Savior not only died for our sins, but that He felt our sickness and pain, heartache and sorrow, regret and bitterness. Through His mercy, we can be healed, uplifted, comforted in our depression and grief, and saved from every dark and evil thought and feeling and physical ailment. Alma proclaimed:

[B]ehold, there is one thing which is of more importance than they all – for behold, the time is not far distant that the Redeemer liveth and cometh among his people. . . .

And he shall go forth, suffering pains and afflictions and temptations of every kind; and this that he word might be fulfilled which saith he will take upon him the pains and the sicknesses of his people.

And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities.

Now the Spirit knoweth all things; nevertheless the Son of God suffereth according to the flesh that he might take upon him the sins of his people, that he might blot out their transgressions according to the power of his deliverance; and now behold, this is the testimony which is in me” (Alma 7:7, 11-13).

Jesus124

Jesus the Christ not only died a cruel death on the cross, but He bled at every pore because the agony and weight of our collective sins, pains, brokenheartedness, disappointment, bitterness, and sicknesses (Luke 22:44). The Jews in Jerusalem did not sufficiently appreciate or comprehend the act being performed in the Garden of Gethsemane by their Lord and Redeemer. Yet, across an ocean in ancient America the Nephites had been taught plainly of the Savior’s Atonement.

About six years prior to the Lord’s birth in the Holy Land, a Lamanite prophet named Samuel prophesied of many events connected with the birth, life, and death of Jesus Christ. At the time, the Nephites were falling into unrighteousness. Samuel warned the people and focused his teachings on Christ:

[N]othing can save this people save it be repentance and faith on the Lord Jesus Christ, who surely shall come into the world, and shall suffer many things and shall be slain for his people. . . .

And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall believe on the Son of God, the same shall have everlasting life. . . .

And if ye believe on his name ye will repent of all your sins, that thereby ye may have a remission of them through his merits. . . .

For behold, he surely must die that salvation may come; yea, it behooveth him and becometh expedient that he dieth, to bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, that thereby men may be brought into the presence of the Lord” (Helaman 13:6; 14:8, 13, 15-17).

From Samuel’s day until the death and resurrection of Christ in Palestine, the prophets continued to preach of the imminent Atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ. Many unique signs were given to the people of the Americas, including major geological upheaval and the destruction of many wicked cities at the time of the Lord’s death on the cross. According to Samuel, these signs were given “to the intent that there should be no cause for unbelief among the children of men – And this to the intent that whosoever will believe might be saved” (Helaman 14:28-29).

These events bring us up to the crowning moment in The Book of Mormon. After the resurrected Lord’s Ascension in Israel, He appeared to other peoples throughout the world. If you search, you can find fascinating secular records of His appearances in many lands. The Book of Mormon record, however, is the clearest of them all and is of divine origin.

Six-hundred years previous to this event, Nephi foretold of the Lord’s appearance. He wrote that “after Christ shall have arisen from the dead he shall show himself unto you, my children, and my beloved brethren; and the words which he shall speak unto you shall be the law which ye shall do” (2 Nephi 26:1). Other prophets had periodically repeated this promise. Shortly after the Ascension, the prophecy was fulfilled in dramatic, miraculous fashion.

We read of the moment of the Lord’s appearance to the Nephites in this passage:

And it came to pass that while they were thus conversing one with another, they heard a voice as if it came out of heaven. . . .

And behold, the third time they did understand the voice which they heard; and it said unto them:

Behold my Beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, in whom I have glorified my name – hear ye him.

Book of Mormon43

And it came to pass, as they understood they cast their eyes up again towards heaven; and behold, they saw a Man descending out of heaven; and he came down and stood in the midst of them; and the eyes of the whole multitude were turned upon him, and they durst not open their mouths, even one to another, and wist not what it meant, for they thought it was an angel that had appeared unto them.

And it came to pass that he stretched forth his hand and spake unto the people, saying:

Behold, I am Jesus Christ, whom the prophets testified shall come into the world.

And behold, I am the light and the life of the world; and I have drunk out of that bitter cup which the Father hath given me, and have glorified the Father in taking upon me the sins of the world, in the which I have suffered the will of the Father in all things from the beginning.

And it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words the whole multitude fell to the earth; for they remembered that it had been prophesied among them that Christ should show himself unto them after his ascension in to heaven.

And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto them saying:

Arise and come forth unto me, that ye may thrust your hands into my side, and also that ye may feel the prints of the nails in my hands and in my feet, that ye may know that I am the God of Israel, and the God of the whole earth, and have been slain for the sins of the world.

And it came to pass that the multitude went forth, and thrust their hands into his side, and did feel the prints of the nails in his hands and in his feet; and this they did do, going forth one by one until they had all gone forth, and did see with their eyes and did feel with their hands, and did know of a surety and did bear record, that it was he, of whom it was written by the prophets, that should come.

And when they had all gone forth and had witnessed for themselves, they did cry out with one accord, saying:

Hosanna! Blessed be the name of the Most High God! And they did fall down at the feet of Jesus, and did worship him” (3 Nephi 11:3, 6-17).

What a remarkable event! This group of some 2,500 Nephites had the privilege of seeing the Lord, hearing His voice, and handling His perfected, glorified, resurrected body of flesh and bone just as the apostles had done in the Holy Land (Luke 24:36-43). They knew for themselves, as we must come to know for ourselves, that He was indeed the Christ, the Son of God, the Savior of mankind!

Jesus taught the Nephites many things during His visit, including the Sermon on the Mount with a few clarifications. He told the people: “Pray in your families unto the Father, always in my name, that your wives and your children may be blessed” (3 Nephi 18:21). He chose twelve apostles, organized them, and gave them Priesthood authority to administer sacraments and ordinances just as He had done during His mortal ministry. He commanded everyone to “diligently” study Isaiah’s prophecies, “for great are the words of Isaiah” (3 Nephi 23:1). He healed the sick, blind, and maim as He had done in Palestine. He blessed the little children and angels came down out of Heaven and ministered to them. And He even touched upon events that would happen during our time – the time preceding His Second Coming. Truly, the appearance of the Son of God was the crowning event recorded in The Book of Mormon and stands as additional proof that this book bears witness of Him and Him alone.

Book of Mormon36

After the Savior’s visit to the Nephites here in America, the people established a Zion-like society. For a little shy of two-hundred years, the people lived in harmony and peace. We read:

[T]here were no contentions and disputations among them, and every man did deal justly one with another.

And they had all things common among them; therefore there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift. . . .

And it came to pass that there was no contention in the land, because of the love of God which did dwell in the hearts of the people.

And there were no envyings, nor strifes, nor tumults, nor whoredoms, nor lyings, nor murders, nor any manner of lasciviousness; and surely there could not be a happier people among all the people who had been created by the hand of God.

There were no robbers, nor murderers, neither were there Lamanites, nor any manner of -ites; but they were in one, the children of Christ, and heirs to the kingdom of God” (4 Nephi 1:2-3, 15-17).

Sadly, the people of the land enjoyed peace, prosperity, and ease for so long that they became prideful, began to wear “costly apparel, and all manner of pearls, and of the fine things of the world,” “began to be divided into classes,” “began to build up churches unto themselves,” and “began to deny the true church of Christ” (4 Nephi 1:24-26). Like our own day, there were “many churches which professed to know the Christ, and yet they did deny the more parts of his gospel” (4 Nephi 1:27).

Eventually, a secret society was formed by those who opposed the Church and Gospel of Jesus Christ. The people’s general wickedness and the ruthlessness of this secret cabal led the people into a frenzied war of rampant destruction. Women and children were sacrificed to pagan gods. Cities were burned with fire. Women were ravaged and mutilated. By 400 A.D., the followers of Christ and anyone who claimed the name “Nephitehad been exterminated throughout ancient America and the only inhabitants left were those who disbelieved in the former Nephite traditions. These unbelieving peoples eventually split into warring factions and, lacking the light of Christ, devolved into nomadic, warlike, and hostile tribes. It would be another 1200 years before Christians began to inhabit America once more.

Book of Mormon16

In every event and story of The Book of Mormon, whether tragic or uplifting, the inspired writings are focused on Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Lord of lords, the true Messiah. In total, there are almost 4,000 references to Jesus Christ in The Book of Mormon! This dwarfs even the New Testament’s multitudinous references to the Savior. The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ is the most Christ-centered book in existence. One cannot read in its pages without encountering fervent testimonies of the Lord, stories of extreme faith in the Redeemer, and sermons on Christian doctrine. The stories of deep-felt conversion, missionary adventures, and wars won through faith in Christ are, simply, thrilling!

I repeat: Nothing is more well-established than that The Book of Mormon speaks of Christ. Because of this fact, when we read the book with a sincere heart, it touches and moves us. The current president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Russell M. Nelson, whom I testify really is a prophet of Almighty God, recently gave a sermon on The Book of Mormon. He witnessed:

Something powerful happens when a child of God seeks to know more about Him and His Beloved Son. Nowhere are those truths taught more clearly and powerfully than in the Book of Mormon. . . .

The Book of Mormon provides the fullest and most authoritative understanding of the Atonement of Jesus Christ to be found anywhere. It teaches what it really means to be born again. From the Book of Mormon we learn about the gathering of scattered Israel. We know why we are here on earth. These and other truths are more powerfully and persuasively taught in the Book of Mormon than in any other book. The full power of the gospel of Jesus Christ is contained in the Book of Mormon. Period. . . .

When I think of the Book of Mormon, I think of the word power. The truths of the Book of Mormon have the power to heal, comfort, restore, succor, strengthen, console, and cheer our souls. . . .

I testify that Jesus Christ is the literal and living Son of our living God. He is our Savior, our Redeemer, our great Exemplar, and our Advocate with the Father. He was the promised Messiah, the mortal Messiah, and will be the millennial Messiah. I testify with my whole soul that in a most miraculous and singular way, the Book of Mormon teaches us of Jesus Christ and His gospel” (President Russell M. Nelson, “The Book of Mormon – What Would Your Life Be Like Without It?” General Conference, October, 2017).

The Book of Mormon, in companionship with the Holy Bible, a witness of our living Lord! These two books of scripture dash to pieces false doctrine, rebut anti-Christian philosophies, and strengthen faith in Jesus Christ and His Atonement. The Book of Mormon writers possessed a version of Old Testament prophecies. They knew that one day these words would go to all mankind. The prophet Mormon, the chief compiler and namesake of The Book of Mormon record, wrote that the intent of the book is to confirm the Bible’s witness of Jesus! In fact, his witness of the Bible’s authenticity was part of his final testimony. The last words Mormon wrote were these:

Jesus220

Know ye that ye must come to the knowledge of your fathers, and repent of all your sins and iniquities, and believe in Jesus Christ, that he is the Son of God, and that he was slain by the Jews, and by the power of the Father he hath risen again, whereby he hath gained the victory over the grave; and also in him is the sting of death swallowed up. . . .

And he hath brought to pass the redemption of the world. . . .

Therefore repent, and be baptized in the name of Jesus, and lay hold upon the gospel of Christ, which shall be set before you, not only in this record but also in the record which shall come unto the Gentiles from the Jews. . . .

For behold, this is written for the intent that ye may believe that; and if ye believe that ye will believe this also. . . .

. . . and if it so be that ye believe in Christ, and are baptized, first with water, then with fire and with the Holy Ghost, following the example of our Savior, according to that which he hath commanded us, it shall be well with you in the day of judgment. Amen” (Mormon 7:5, 7-10).

Mormon knew that The Book of Mormon was written “for the intent that ye may believe [the Bible].” And if you believe the Bible’s witness of Christ, it is only logical “that ye will believe [The Book of Mormon] also” because both books bear solemn witness of the Savior, preach the same doctrine, and declare the same essential truths.

President Russell M. Nelson explained how these two great books of scripture compliment one another and work together. He said:

The Bible and the Book of Mormon are both witnesses of Jesus Christ. They teach that He is the Son of God, that He lived an exemplary life, that He atoned for all mankind, that He died upon the cross and rose again as the resurrected Lord. They teach that He is the Savior of the world.

The Book of Mormon15

Scriptural witnesses authenticate each other. This concept was explained long ago when a prophet wrote that the Book of Mormon was “written for the intent that ye may believe [the Bible]; and if ye believe [the Bible] ye will believe [the Book of Mormon] also.” Each book refers to the other. Each book stands as evidence that God lives and speaks to His children by revelation to His prophets.

Love for the Book of Mormon expands one’s love for the Bible and vice versa. Scriptures of the Restoration do not compete with the Bible; they complement the Bible. We are indebted to martyrs who gave their lives so that we could have the Bible. It establishes the everlasting nature of the gospel and of the plan of happiness. The Book of Mormon restores and underscores biblical doctrines such as tithing, the temple, the Sabbath day, and the priesthood” (President Russell M. Nelson, “Scriptural Witnesses,” General Conference, October, 2007).

The Book of Mormon does not replace, but bolsters the Bible! In our day of so much criticism and skepticism, it is refreshing to know that the Lord has given us a second major witness that the Bible’s declarations about Him and His work are indeed true and relevant! Even Nephi, all those ages ago, knew that modern man would have both Bible and The Book of Mormon. He recorded the words of the Lord directed to those who scoff at The Book of Mormon and rejected it because they already have a Bible and erroneously believe there can be no more revelation:

And because my words shall hiss forth – many of the Gentiles shall say: A Bible! A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible. . . .

Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible. . . .

Know ye not that there are more nations than one? Know ye not that I, the Lord your God, have created all men, and that I remember those who are upon the isles of the sea; and that I rule in the heavens above and in the earth beneath; and I bring forth my word unto the children of men, yea, even upon all the nations of the earth?

Wherefore murmur ye, because that ye shall receive more of my word? Know ye not that the testimony of two nations is a witness unto you that I am God, that I remember one nation like unto another? Wherefore, I speak the same words unto one nation like unto another. And when the two nations shall run together the testimony of the two nations shall run together also.

And I do this that I may prove unto many that I am the same yesterday, today, and forever; and that I speak forth my words according to mine own pleasure. And because that I have spoken one word ye need not suppose that I cannot speak another; for my work is not yet finished; neither shall it be until the end of man, neither from that time henceforth and forever.

Wherefore, because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be written. . . .

For behold, I shall speak unto the Jews and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto the Nephites and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto the other tribes of the house of Israel, which I have led away, and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto all nations of the earth and they shall write it. . . .

. . . and my word also shall be fathered in one” (2 Nephi 29:3, 6, 7-10, 12, 14).

It has always puzzled me why Christians try to limit the Lord and tell Him, in essence, that He can’t say more than He already has. Not only is this a feeble attempt to limit the Lord’s power, but it also makes the Bible’s declarations about the need for prophets and continuing revelation null and void. Furthermore, I’ve always wondered why my fellow Christians are not excited for more revelation from Heaven. Why wouldn’t you want to hear more instruction from the Master? Why wouldn’t you want additional light and knowledge to support and clarify what the Bible teaches? Why wouldn’t you want an extra witness to support and verify what the Old and New Testament seers said? Why don’t you want more of the words of Jesus?

Jesus131

President Gordon B. Hinckley, a former president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, once spoke to those not of our faith:

[W]e say in a spirit of love, bring with you all that you have of good and truth which you have received from whatever source, and come and let us see if we may add to it. This invitation I extend to men and women everywhere with my solemn testimony that this work is true, for I know the truth of it by the power of the Holy Ghost” (President Gordon B. Hinckley, “The Marvelous Foundation of Our Faith,” General Conference, October, 2002).

To those who may be skeptical, set aside your skepticism for a moment and do what the Lord anciently instructed: “Come and see” (John 1:39). Come and see what the Lord has revealed in our day. Come and see what rich treasures of knowledge The Book of Mormon has to offer. Come and see what modern prophets are saying today. Ignore the lies and distortions that dissenters on the internet say about our Church and come and see for yourself.

I guarantee when you humbly search in The Book of Mormon and pray to God for wisdom as the Apostle James taught (James 1:5-6), that new light will shine into your life. Your understanding of the Bible will grow Your soul will be refreshed. Your testimony of the Savior will deepen and strengthen. Your knowledge of your relationship with your Eternal Father will expand. And your happiness will increase.

If my guarantee is not enough, then hear the words of the final prophet to write in The Book of Mormon. He was a man named Moroni. He issued this divine promise:

Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.

And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things” (Moroni 10:3-5).

This promise works. I have tried it. It works! If you ask Heavenly Father, in the name of Christ, and you are truly sincere and prepared to follow whatever answer you receive from the Holy Spirit, then you will receive a confirmation in your soul that The Book of Mormon is a true book.

I have received this witness. I know it is true. I know it through the power of the Holy Ghost. I know it was translated, not written, by Joseph Smith. I know that it speaks of a real people whom the resurrected Lord truly visited. I know it was compiled by prophets of Jesus Christ who spoke the truth. And I know and testify that this sacred book has shaped, directed, and improved my life in innumerable ways.

The Book of Mormon is such a powerful book for two primary reasons: 1) Because it speak of Jesus Christ; and 2) because it is true. The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ is a true witness of the Savior. It confirms the Bible’s witness of the divinity of Jesus. It confirms the Abrahamic covenants made with the House of Israel. It confirms that we will all be resurrected and stand before God at the Judgment Day. It confirms that Jesus worked out the Atonement and died for our sins and that we must look to Him only for salvation. Yes, The Book of Mormon speaks of Christ!

It is only fitting that we end with a declaration made in The Book of Mormon by a holy prophet. They are words to live by. They rivet our focus on the Savior and encourage us to look to Him. We must all eventually come to know and accept that: “[T]here is no other way or means whereby man can be saved, only in and through Christ. Behold, he is the life and the light of the world. Behold, he is the word of truth and righteousness” (Alma 38:9).

Atelier 587

I share this testimony with you – that Jesus Christ lives and that The Book of Mormon is a true witness to His divinity – in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

Zack Strong,

January 13, 2020

Private Property Essential to Liberty

There can be no Liberty without the right to own and manage private property. Private property is essential to Liberty. It is indispensable to individuality and fundamental to life itself. Where there is no right to private property, there is no Freedom and self-will. In order to maintain our American Republic in Liberty, we must reclaim and secure our cardinal right to own and oversee our own private property.

tyranny32

The great political scientist Frederic Bastiat, in his classic book The Law, defined property this way. Note how it encompasses much more than mere objects and tangible possessions, but is wrapped up in the very concept of Liberty:

We hold from God the gift which includes all others. This gift is life — physical, intellectual, and moral life.

But life cannot maintain itself alone. The Creator of life has entrusted us with the responsibility of preserving, developing, and perfecting it. In order that we may accomplish this, He has provided us with a collection of marvelous faculties. And He has put us in the midst of a variety of natural resources. By the application of our faculties to these natural resources we convert them into products, and use them. This process is necessary in order that life may run its appointed course.

Life, faculties, production — in other words, individuality, liberty, property — this is man. And in spite of the cunning of artful political leaders, these three gifts from God precede all human legislation, and are superior to it. Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.”

These words are found at the very beginning of Bastiat’s The Law. They are at the beginning because Bastiat understood that there can be no comprehension of Liberty without a correct understanding, first, of the importance of private property and individual stewardship.

Property is the root of Liberty. It is the foundation of free will. It is the essence of personhood. In a very real sense, there is no life – at least, no life that satisfies and uplifts – without property. What is our life without our God-given right to own and manage private property?

property5

Our Eternal Father created us, His children, and sent us to earth to progress and grow. But how can we accomplish this mission of growth and progression unless we have a personal stewardship to manage, direct, and be personally accountable for? How can we have a stewardship without private property to superintend? And how can we claim we have Freedom if we do not enjoy property and, thereby the chance to use our faculties in administering a stewardship of our own?

Protecting property – that is, life and and the essence of Liberty – is the reason governments exist. The Declaration of Independence states that “to secure [our] rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” The three rights specifically mentioned, though of course there are many more, are the rights of “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Thomas Jefferson adapted his phraseology from the common political thought of the time regarding the three cardinal rights of man – life, Liberty, and property. Some have erroneously charged Jefferson with plagiarism, but the fact is that the notion of “life, Liberty, and property” was widespread. For instance, the Virginia Declaration of Rights, ratified on June 12, 1776, contained this paragraph:

That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.”

Perhaps more famously, the British philosopher John Locke, whom Jefferson highly regarded, had written in his Second Treatise on Government that man has a right “to preserve his property, that is, his life, liberty and estate.” Locke elaborated on the idea of property in these terms:

[E]very man has a property in his own person: this no body has any right to but himself. The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his. Whatsoever then he removes out of the state that nature hath provided, and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property. It being by him removed from the common state nature hath placed it in, it hath by this labour something annexed to it, that excludes the common right of other men: for this labour being the unquestionable property of the labourer, no man but he can have a right to what that is once joined to, at least where there is enough, and as good, left in common for others. . . .

property9

. . . God, when he gave the world in common to all mankind, commanded man also to labour, and the penury of his condition required it of him. God and his reason commanded him to subdue the earth, i.e. improve it for the benefit of life, and therein lay out something upon it that was his own, his labour. He that in obedience to this command of God, subdued, tilled and sowed any part of it, thereby annexed to it something that was his property, which another had no title to, nor could without injury take from him. . . .

Thus labour, in the beginning, gave a right of property, wherever any one was pleased to employ it upon what was common. . . .

The reason why men enter into society, is the preservation of their property; and the end why they chuse and authorize a legislative, is, that there may be laws made, and rules set, as guards and fences to the properties of all the members of the society.”

Other thinkers besides Locke, including the most prominent American Founding Fathers, expressed similar ideas and knew the value of private property rights. They understood that every individual “has a property in his own person” – that is, his life – and that by the labor of his hands he acquires and exercises a stewardship over other property, for which he is accountable. This individual stewardship and accountability over property and life is the fundamental essence of what we call Liberty.

When seen in the light of Bastiat’s explanation of property, we better understand Jefferson’s phrase “pursuit of Happiness.” It is impossible for man to be happy without property. Or, in other words, it is impossible for man pursue a course that leads to happiness without a stewardship, the control of which is authentic life and true Liberty.

We turn again to Frederic Bastiat. He contemplated the purpose of law, government, and society. As before, please note how property correlates to Liberty:

What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.

Each of us has a natural right — from God — to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties? If every person has the right to defend even by force — his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right — its reason for existing, its lawfulness — is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.”

The fundamental basis of civil society is property! Civilization exists to protect individual rights – the most fundamental being life and the stewardship over property that gives that life meaning.

property10

The Founding Fathers knew how important property was. The Bill of Rights was written to protect, among other things, property. The Fifth Amendment, for instance, declared that no citizen shall “be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” These lines in truth encompass the whole of the Constitution and all of our rights. For example, gun confiscation not only violates the Second Amendment, it violates the Fifth by depriving an individual, without due process in a court of law, of his property (i.e. his weapon), his Liberty (i.e. his right to defend himself), and sets him up to be deprived of his life.

The Father of the Constitution, James Madison, concurred with Bastiat and Locke. He gave an eloquent description of property and the purpose of government. Madison stated:

This term [i.e. property] in its particular application means “that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual.”

In its larger and juster meaning, it embraces every thing to which a man may attach a value and have a right; and which leaves to every one else the like advantage.

In the former sense, a man’s land, or merchandize, or money is called his property.

In the latter sense, a man has a property in his opinions and the free communication of them.

He has a property of peculiar value in his religious opinions, and in the profession and practice dictated by them.

He has a property very dear to him in the safety and liberty of his person.

He has an equal property in the free use of his faculties and free choice of the objects on which to employ them.

In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights.

Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions. . . .

Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own. . . .

. . . Conscience is the most sacred of all property; other property depending in part on positive law, the exercise of that, being a natural and unalienable right. . . .

That is not a just government, nor is property secure under it, where the property which a man has in his personal safety and personal liberty, is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest. . . .

That is not a just government, nor is property secure under it, where arbitrary restrictions, exemptions, and monopolies deny to part of its citizens that free use of their faculties, and free choice of their occupations, which not only constitute their property in the general sense of the word; but are the means of acquiring property strictly so called. . . .

government17

A just security to property is not afforded by that government, under which unequal taxes oppress one species of property and reward another species: where arbitrary taxes invade the domestic sanctuaries of the rich, and excessive taxes grind the faces of the poor. . . .

If there be a government then which prides itself in maintaining the inviolability of property; which provides that none shall be taken directly even for public use without indemnification to the owner, and yet directly violates the property which individuals have in their opinions, their religion, their persons, and their faculties; nay more, which indirectly violates their property, in their actual possessions, in the labor that acquires their daily subsistence, and in the hallowed remnant of time which ought to relieve their fatigues and soothe their cares, the influence will have been anticipated, that such a government is not a pattern for the United States.

If the United States mean to obtain or deserve the full praise due to wise and just governments, they will equally respect the rights of property, and the property in rights” (James Madison, March 29, 1792).

There is much to digest and learn from this description, but the takeaways are these: 1) That man has an inherent right to property, which includes not only his tangible goods like his house and land, but his opinions, conscience, and life; and 2) that government exists to preserve property and can only be considered “wise and just” when it secures this right to each individual.

Like his fellow Founders, John Adams was fierce on the point of private property. He said property is sacred and must be protected as equally as the laws of God Almighty. He wrote:

Property is surely a right of mankind as really as liberty . . . The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If “Thou shalt not covet,” and “Thou shalt not steal,” were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free. (John Adams, “A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America,” 1787).

Another time, John Adams simply stated: “Property must be secured, or liberty cannot exist” (John Adams, “Discourses on Davila,” Chapter XIII).

Samuel Adams was every bit as forceful. To him, forfeiting one’s right of private property is to make oneself a slave. He affirmed:

In short, it is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one, or any number of men, at the entering into society, to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights; when the grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution, is for the support, protection, and defence of those very rights; the principal of which, as is before observed, are Life, Liberty, and Property. If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave” (Samuel Adams, “The Rights of the Colonists,” November 20, 1772).

We could continue citing quotes from wise men on the necessity of property and the correlation between property and Liberty, but the point has already been made. Let’s now discuss the opponents of Liberty. The greatest enemies of Freedom are those which seek to abolish private property and, with it, the meaning of life and the essence of Liberty. I speak of the communists specifically and of collectivists in general.

communism775

The Communist Manifesto declares that “the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.” Taking what we know about the relationship of Liberty and property, we can rewrite the communist goal in these words: Abolition of individual Liberty.

The communist desire to abolish Freedom is openly admitted in the Manifesto. Marx noted that capitalists complained that the communists’ planned destruction of capital, that is, wealth, industry, and property, would mean the destruction of Liberty as well. In response, the Manifesto, nonchalantly states: “And the abolition of this state of things is called by the bourgeois, abolition of individuality and freedom! And rightly so. The abolition of bourgeois individuality, bourgeois independence, and bourgeois freedom is undoubtedly aimed at.”

You better believe that today’s conspirators – the Satanic communists who lord over us – still desire to destroy Freedom by abolishing private property. They have successfully succeeded in curtailing property rights throughout most of the world, including nearly everywhere in socialist Europe. They are well on their way to undermining our property rights here in the United States, too.

There are many tactics which the enemy uses to subvert our property rights. James Madison mentioned several. I name only three. First, the big-government oligarchs spend so much money and rack up so much debt that an increase in taxes is necessary to pay for it. This unnecessary and exorbitant taxation is nothing but theft of our personal property – property that belongs rightfully to us and which is earned through our own hard labor. And disproportionate and unequal taxation – which people who advocate higher taxes on the rich are really calling for – is more egregious still, constituting little more than classic wealth redistribution. Inflation, which we fork out money to cover at the grocery store and elsewhere very day, is another hidden tax that also robs us of the fruit of our labor. Minimum wage laws also destroy Liberty and property by stripping from employers the right to decide how to dispense their own property and how to run their own businesses. Socialized medicine – welfare statism – is yet another way government expands, centralizes power, and destroys our wealth (i.e. property) taxation.

Second, our property rights are increasingly curtailed by bureaucratic regulations. Government regulations now number in the hundreds of thousands. These arbitrary and unconstitutional regulations dictate how we can and cannot use our land, how we can and cannot use technology, how we can and cannot run our businesses, who we can and cannot hire, and so forth. Regulations restrict our Freedom to use our property according to the dictates of our conscience and in the pursuit of our personal happiness. It therefore inhibits our full exercise of stewardship – and without stewardship and accountability over property there is no Liberty.

communism774

Third, the outright theft of property under spurious justifications increasing at an alarming rate. Americans now lose more property every year to police than to robbers. Under tyrannical asset forfeiture laws, police rob Americans of their property and livelihoods. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is another arm of government that has been busy stealing private land coast to coast. Indeed, government agencies of all types have been confiscating hundreds of thousands of acres of land, in Bolshevik fashion, from innocent Americans – and they’ve been caught on tape bragging and laughing about it! Karl Marx would be proud of what the U.S. government has been turned into by Marxist moles.

No matter how the communists and their abettors do it, the destruction or theft of private property is nothing more nor less than the destruction and theft of Freedom. Remember, even Marx himself acknowledged that the goal is “the abolition of bourgeois individuality, bourgeois independence, and bourgeois freedom.” Please understand that the enemy doesn’t need to arrest you and put you in a cage to take your Freedom. They can do it just as easily by confiscating your property through taxers or by restricting your ability to control your property via bureaucratic regulations.

There can be no real Liberty without private property. There can be little value in life devoid of individual stewardship – and stewardship is embodied in one’s control of private property. In order to be free agents and fully accountable for our individual actions, we must have the right to acquire and control private property. Without this right, no other right really matters. Without private property, there is no Liberty. Without private property, individuality is a hollow talking point. Without private property, we are a collective mass of equally miserable beings. And without the right of private property, there is no Liberty.

America115

I urge you to rise in opposition to the enemies of private property – the communists and big-government collectivists. I encourage you to never relinquish your private property willing, for in so doing you become a slave. And I implore you to always remember that property and Liberty are inseparably linked and that the latter cannot exist without the former. Keep ever in mind the truth that our rightful stewardship over private property is the essence of our Liberty and the essence of our success as Americans. God help America reclaim her sacred rights and her precious Freedom!

Zack Strong,

January 10, 2020