Friday, May 26, 2017

Jasmine Holmes‏ ― The Church Doesn’t Need Feminism, She Has Scripture

The eradication of gender roles is not the only road to gender equality. 

Before the poet’s mouth even opened, her t-shirt polarized the audience. And when she did open her mouth, the shirt turned out to be the perfect backdrop for her poem: a treatise about the lack of respect women receive in our society. She railed against sexism, the damsel in distress trope, the victimization of women, and the commodification of their bodies. 

Her poem crescendos with a call to end the stereotypes that women face every single day, then erupt in her vision of womanhood: men and women, both created in God’s image, both equal before him — or her. And if her shirt offends you — maybe you’re part of the problem. Maybe God is a feminist. 

I watched her poem with a familiar internal conflict. Because, on the one hand, I have seen sexism both inside and outside of the church. I have watched the damage of the damsel in distress ideology that paints women as little girls in need of a strong savior (lower-case s). I’ve watched women in my life overcome victimization at the hands of men who were supposed to protect them. And I’ve seen women’s bodies treated merely as tools to keep their husbands satisfied. Those problems are real.

Read more »

Estelle featuring Sean Paul - Come Over [feat. Sean Paul]


Wednesday, May 24, 2017

Chidike Okeem ― The End of Artificial Black Conservatism

If black conservatism is to be taken seriously as a sociopolitical force and intellectual movement, it cannot simply be an appendage of a mainstream conservative movement that is overtly hostile to blacks.


Black people are dramatically declining in sociopolitical power in the United States. While many recognize the problematic nature of the hegemonic control that the Democratic Party has on the black vote, many do not concern themselves with the fact that black conservatism is generally not respected as a serious intellectual movement. Black conservatism has the reputation of being an ideology associated with blacks who have self-worth issues and feel it is necessary to trash the entire race for validation—and remuneration—from white conservative audiences.
 It is an analytical mistake to confuse blacks’ rejection of mainstream conservatism as a wholesale rejection of conservative thought. Rather, it is simply a rejection of artificial black conservatism. Manifestly, the most visible form of black conservatism in American society is the artificial strain. That is to say, many prominent black conservatives use their blackness as a convenient cosmetic feature, but blackness is truly foreign to their ideology. They use the problems in the black community as an opportunity to deride black people—as opposed to persuading blacks about the superiority of conservative solutions. 
The mixture of blackness and conservatism is incorrectly looked at as an oddity by many political observers. In American society, people marvel at the sight of a black person who “astoundingly” supports limited government, entrepreneurialism, and social values rooted in authentic morality. Black people who hold conservative values are not odd. What can be considered odd, however, are blacks who are willing to unquestioningly repeat the talking points of the mainstream conservative movement. Black conservatives who are serious about the betterment of the black community cannot simply co-sign every talking point offered by the mainstream conservative movement. It is simply impossible to be a serious black conservative without demonstrating notable differences from the mainstream right. 
The mainstream conservative movement has no respect for independent black conservative thinkers. Creative and intrepid black conservative intellectuals are counterproductive to the role that the black conservative is supposed to fill in the mainstream American conservative movement. Blacks in the mainstream American conservative movement are simply resigned to being convenient spokespeople who dutifully absolve the white right of any unpleasant charges of racism. Indeed, artificial black conservatism is more beneficial to the white right than it is to the black community. Artificial black conservatives are every bit as subservient to the right as many left-wing blacks are to the American left.
In post-Trayvon America, it is simply farcical to suggest that mainstream conservatives do not show a casual disregard for black life. Only an artificial black conservative could have stood with mainstream American conservatives as they enthusiastically supported George Zimmerman and treated the shooting death of Trayvon Martin as an inconsequential episode. In order to advance as an artificial black conservative within mainstream conservatism, showing a callous disregard for black life and black suffering is a prerequisite, which explains why an otherwise brilliant man like world-renowned neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson flippantly compared Obamacare to slavery—and received whistles and applause from a largely white conservative audience. Attempting to persuade black people to join a version of black conservatism that has no discernible difference to mainstream conservatism is a fool’s errand.
The hostility of mainstream conservatism to the black race can even be seen from the esteemed Supreme Court. Justice Antonin Scalia called the Voting Rights Act of 1965 “a racial entitlement.” Scalia’s comment must be taken in context with the broader ideology advocated by the godfather of modern American conservatism, the late William F. Buckley, Jr., who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and was an avowed white supremacist who wrote about the inferiority of the Negro. Buckley supported whites dominating blacks in both domestic (Jim Crow) and global (South African apartheid) contexts. Scalia’s comments should not be seen in isolation, inasmuch as they are wholly consistent with the history of mainstream conservatism. Simply pointing out that Republican politicians supported civil rights bills in the 1960s is not a refutation of the fact that many ideological thought leaders in the mainstream conservative movement did not. 

Travis Greene ― Made A Way (Official Video)

K.A. Ellis ― Ancestors on Mission: Maria Fearing (1838-1937)

WePreserve - On July 26, 1838, Maria (Ma-rye-ah) Fearing was born a slave near Gainesville, Alabama. As a house servant, she spent much of her time with her mistress and the other children. Though her owners taught their slaves the Presbyterian catechism, told them Bible stories and tales of missionaries in Africa, they refused to voluntarily free her.

After her legal emancipation in 1865, the newly freed family took the surname Fearing. At thirty-three years old she completed the ninth grade, had learned to read and write, and began working her way through the Freedman’s Bureau School in Talladega (Talladega College) to become a teacher. She taught for a number of years in the rural schools of Calhoun County, and purchased her own home.

Thabiti Anyabwile ― This Black Pastor Led a White Church—in 1788

The remarkable tenure and steadfast faithfulness of Lemuel Haynes.

“If the church is to prosper and mature, she will need faithful men to lead and care for her. The church will need men who are sound in doctrine, whose lives are guided by the Word of God, and who are willing to defend the truth. The church will need to hold up as its ideal those who model fidelity and love toward God, men who will pour themselves out for the benefit of the Lord’s sheep. Men of this mold are gifts to the church from her Lord. In the late 1700s the Lord did indeed give such a gift to the church”
Lemuel Haynes.



Christianity Today - Lemuel Haynes was born on July 18, 1753 in West Hartford, Connecticut. Early biographers speculated that Haynes’s mother was either a daughter of the prominent Goodwin family of Hartford or a servant named Alice Fitch who worked for one John Haynes. However, speculations about his parentage proved profitless. Abandoned by his parents at five months of age, Haynes was raised as an indentured servant by the Rose family in Middle Granville, Massachusetts. The Roses treated Lemuel as one of the family’s own children, giving him the same pious instruction in Christianity and family worship that Deacon Rose gave all his children.

Read more: http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/2017/may/lemuel-haynes-pioneering-african-american-pastor.html

Darrell B. Harrison ― How the Easiness of ‘American Christianity’ Minimizes the Atonement of Christ

“For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” – 1 Corinthians 1:18 (NASB)


JustThinking.me - Unlike our persecuted brethren in countries like China and North Korea, who must resort to obtaining bibles through clandestine and surreptitious means – often at risk of their own lives – we need not concern ourselves with the hazards of having the gospel smuggled in to us because, as the saying goes, “there’s an app for that”.

The stylistic nuances and ecumenical aesthetics to which we have become so accustomed, particularly as it relates to our personal preferences in corporate worship, have fostered a collective spirit of indifference to the fundamental reason why we gather together to worship to begin with: the death of the Son of God on the cross.

Read more: https://justthinking.me/2017/03/25/how-the-easiness-of-american-christianity-minimizes-the-atonement-of-christ/

Lisa Robinson ― What is covenant theology? And why the question can be misleading

In reality, covenant theology is not an imposition on Scripture at all but rather an extraction from Scripture.

https://theothoughts.com/about/TheoThoughts.com - Today, a friend asked me to explain what is covenant theology. I get the question and it’s one I would have asked years ago at the mere mention of the name. In fact, when I first heard the term several years ago, my immediate frame of thinking was this: it is a system of thought imposed on Scripture especially when terms like covenant of works and covenant of grace are used to describe it. Unfortunately, unless you’re immersed in Reformed and particularly Presbyterian circles, this idea of imposition can cause a spurning of sorts as if somehow this is contrasted with the just reading the Bible. In simple terms, covenant theology can be rejected because of an erroneous belief that it is doctrine imposed on Scripture and wholly separate from a biblical theology derived from simply reading Scripture.

In reality, covenant theology is not an imposition on Scripture at all but rather an extraction from Scripture. In other words, covenant theology is essentially derived from a holistic rendering of Scripture and considers the anchor that holds the 66 books together: that is God’s gracious actions towards his creation based on covenant which is embedded throughout the biblical narrative. Covenant theology looks at the whole picture and asks ‘what is God doing?’ from Genesis to Revelation. So terms like covenant of works (or more appropriately life-the foundation for his creation) and covenant of grace (his rescue of a fallen creation from the kernel promise of Gen. 3:15) are essentially capturing God’s redemptive action towards his creation based on this whole picture.

Read more: https://theothoughts.com/2017/05/21/what-is-covenant-theology-and-why-the-question-can-be-misleading/

Akil Alleyne ― No, Removing Confederate Monuments Does Not "Erase History"

I take aim at perhaps the silliest and shallowest argument against taking down tributes to the Confederate States of America.


Anthony "Rek" LeCounte ― Occupational Licensing at a Funeral

As Communications Project Manager for the Institute for Justice, Anthony “Rek” LeCounte works hard to make the public case for economic liberty, free speech, private property rights, and school choice for all Americans.


The Institute for Justice - Funeral services necessarily involve a difficult time for the consumers who need them, and the pain of loss can often be compounded by the logistical expenses involved. Unfortunately, the cost of funeral expenses is significantly higher when occupational licensing is involved.

In a new study published in the June 2017 edition of the International Review of Law and Economics, Brandon Pizzola and Alexander Tabarrok use a “natural experiment” to show that occupational licensing requirements on funeral service providers increase the cost of workers and services. Conversely, the lack of such requirements decreases costs.

Colorado delicensed its funeral services industry in 1983, providing researchers an opportunity to compare the effects of the regulatory change in the state to national developments. Unsurprisingly, Pizzola and Tabarrok found that funeral costs fell in Colorado, compared with the rest of the United States, because licensing causes a “wage premium” of 11 to 12 percent due to lack of competition. This finding echoes other research that has shown licensing requirements in other industries lead to similar spikes in cost. Insiders, in funeral services and other industries, often support licensing requirements precisely for this reason: Licensing creates artificial “job protection” by making it harder for competition to drive down costs.

Read more: http://ij.org/occupational-licensing-funeral/

Africa's Great Civilizations - Part 1

In his new six-hour series, Africa's Great Civilizations, Henry Louis Gates, Jr. takes a new look at the history of Africa, from the birth of humankind to the dawn of the 20th century. This is a breathtaking and personal journey through two hundred thousand years of history, from the origins, on the African continent, of art, writing and civilization itself, through the millennia in which Africa and Africans shaped not only their own rich civilizations, but also the wider world.


Stephen L. Carter ― Can the Special Counsel Uncover the Truth? Dream On

Robert Mueller is unlikely to give us the answers we crave in the Russia-Trump investigation, no matter how qualified he is.


Bloomberg View - The appointment of a special counsel is always a tragedy, in the sense that going under the surgeon’s knife is always a tragedy. Like the human body, the government should function smoothly without the need to slice and cut. The Justice Department brings in an outsider only when the public does not trust the executive branch to investigate itself. Even when, as now, there may be good reason for the mistrust, the moment is hardly one for celebration. Even when we know surgery is necessary, we do not throw parties.

So although I fervently hope that Robert S. Mueller III will perform as admirably in the role of special counsel as he did in the role of director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, I am not ready to turn handsprings. Like most of us, I would like to know the truth about any ties between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and the Russian government. But although Mueller is a man of unquestioned probity and determination, I have never much liked the idea of special counsels, even back in the days when they were appointed by the judiciary and called independent counsels, not least because the counsel is not really subject to any authority but his own. The investigation can range as widely as any particular individual holding the position might wish.


Kareim Oliphant ― White Supremacist Ideas Must Be Challenged, Not Ignored

To argue that incredibly bad ideas simply die on their own, especially if they go unopposed, and that these ideas have no potential to rise from relative obscurity to national (or even international) preeminence, is to argue in contravention of the historical record.


Ku Klux Klan members march down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C. in 1928.
Outset Magazine - Some hold the view that the best way to deal with white supremacists is to
ignore them. For if we shed light on the contemptibility of white supremacist ideas, the logic goes, we are merely giving them undue attention—attention that presumably produces a worse outcome for society than allowing their racist views to go unchallenged. Proponents of this view are also quick to dismiss white supremacists as “basement dwellers” who are simply “fringe elements” of the society. But there are a few critical problems with this assessment.

Read more: http://outsetmagazine.com/2016/12/20/challenge-white-supremacist-ideas/

Tuesday, May 9, 2017

Dennis Sanders ― Mugged By Reality: A Conservative for Universal Health Care

Twenty years ago, I learned of the importance of health insurance and the role of the government in health insurance the hard way.

In November 1996, I caught the flu. At the time, I was 27 and working at a major coffee chain making $6/hour. Health care was available, but when you make only $6/hour and have to pay for various things like food and rent, health care becomes out of reach.

So, I spent a few days in bed until I felt good enough to go back to work. I felt okay for a few days, but then the illness came back with a vengeance. I couldn’t keep anything down. I started having trouble breathing. I should have gone to the clinic I frequented which offered care to the low income on a sliding fee scale. But I went to the county hospital in downtown Minneapolis.

A young doctor examined me and said it was penumonia. He gave me a five day supply of antibiotics (the usual course is ten days for something as routine as sinus infection). I didn’t get better. I got worse. I had a high fever and I was getting a case of thrush on my tongue turning it white. In the meantime my parents drove from Michigan to take care of me. I was able to see the nurse practitioner at the clinic and she took a blood test and an xray. She came back into the examination room and told me that I needed to be admitted into the hospital. My white blood cell count was 70,000, which meant my body was fighting off a massive infection. I wondered  how in the hell was I going to pay for this.

The nurse practitioner told me not worry.

Read more: https://medium.com/@dennissanders/mugged-by-reality-a-conservative-for-universal-health-care-53ced244b1cd?platform=hootsuite

Thursday, May 4, 2017

Kareim Oliphant ― Sheriff David Clarke’s Misguided War on #BlackLivesMatter

Republicans cannot keep complaining about the seemingly unbreakable Democratic hegemony of black communities so long as they continue to promote callously unaware characters like Sheriff David Clarke. Since conservatives and Republicans continue to prop up people like David Clarke who assert that black grievances are fictional, they deserve their reputation as the political wing that is insensitive to the needs of blacks.

 David Clarke photo taken by Gage Skidmore
OUTSET - Last Friday, POLITICO reported that the White House is considering Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke Jr. for a position at the Department of Homeland Security.

According to the report, “Clarke is in line to be appointed as assistant secretary at DHS’ Office of Partnership and Engagement, which coordinates outreach to state, local and tribal officials and law enforcement.”

This announcement should come as no surprise to those who have astutely observed Sheriff Clarke’s recent dramatic rise to national notoriety since coming out as a vociferous supporter of Donald Trump.


Read more: http://outsetmagazine.com/2017/05/04/sheriff-david-clarke/

Monday, May 1, 2017

Jeff Holiday ― The Case Against Stefan Molyneux and Race Realism (Part 2)

The Problem With Race Realism Part 2: Somethin' Wrong With Stefan

Jeff Holiday ― The Case Against Stefan Molyneux and Race Realism (Part 1)

The Problem With Race Realism Part 1: Defining Intelligence



The Problem With Race Realism Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjcpaHwEEAY

Race Realism = Real Racism

Debunking White Nationalism

This video contains several arguments supporting the claim that white nationalism is not in the best interests of whites because, at its core, it is a philosophy that implicitly states that whites are inherently weak.



Diversity Is Not The Problem - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMCXtd6p0BU

Ayo Sogunro ― Humanity and the sins of Ambode

Sometime last week, the Norwegian Ambassador to Nigeria visited the rarely remarked Otodo Gbame, a fishing settlement at the Lagos waterfronts. This foreign leader had gone there to assess what has become an emerging refugee crisis in the Otodo Gbame community and to offer them his encouragement. When we wonder why the West seems to be one step ahead of us, this is one of the reasons. They visit our people to assess and study our problems and they formulate their policies to suit the facts they have learned. While they do these, we exert our energy on directionless dramas about uniforms and certificates, proudly hosted by our dysfunctional National Assembly. 

It is not surprising that our own leaders are missing from the scene when one of theirs, Mr Akinwunmi Ambode, is responsible for the crisis. The hitherto peaceful community of Otodo Gbame has been under siege by the Lagos State government since October 2016 as the people battled with the government in court to save their homes. In March 2017, the government finally invaded with the full force of bulldozers and weapons: wreaking havoc, destroying homes and property, threatening people with live weapons, and injuring some. Those who protested were arrested and detained: including the elderly. These events would have passed with little mention – another daily exercise of government power in Nigeria – but for the continuous publicity of the issues by the good people at Justice & Empowerment Initiatives. After all, this is the country where the military ‘accidentally’ bombed a displaced persons camp and business proceeded as usual in the legislature, the executive and the judiciary.
   
Read more: https://ayosogunro.com/2017/04/02/humanity-and-the-sins-of-ambode-by-ayo-sogunro/

George Orwell Notes on Nationalism


George Orwell: ‘Notes on Nationalism’
First published:
Polemic. — GB, London. — May 1945.


Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism.

Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.

So long as it is applied merely to the more notorious and identifiable nationalist movements in Germany, Japan, and other countries, all this is obvious enough. Confronted with a phenomenon like Nazism, which we can observe from the outside, nearly all of us would say much the same things about it. But here I must repeat what I said above, that I am only using the word ‘nationalism’ for lack of a better. Nationalism, in the extended sense in which I am using the word, includes such movements and tendencies as Communism, political Catholicism, Zionism, Antisemitism, Trotskyism and Pacifism. It does not necessarily mean loyalty to a government or a country, still less to one's own country, and it is not even strictly necessary that the units in which it deals should actually exist. To name a few obvious examples, Jewry, Islam, Christendom, the Proletariat and the White Race are all of them objects of passionate nationalistic feeling: but their existence can be seriously questioned, and there is no definition of any one of them that would be universally accepted.

It is also worth emphasising once again that nationalist feeling can be purely negative. There are, for example, Trotskyists who have become simply enemies of the U.S.S.R. without developing a corresponding loyalty to any other unit. When one grasps the implications of this, the nature of what I mean by nationalism becomes a good deal clearer. A nationalist is one who thinks solely, or mainly, in terms of competitive prestige. He may be a positive or a negative nationalist — that is, he may use his mental energy either in boosting or in denigrating — but at any rate his thoughts always turn on victories, defeats, triumphs and humiliations. He sees history, especially contemporary history, as the endless rise and decline of great power units, and every event that happens seems to him a demonstration that his own side is on the upgrade and some hated rival is on the downgrade. But finally, it is important not to confuse nationalism with mere worship of success. The nationalist does not go on the principle of simply ganging up with the strongest side. On the contrary, having picked his side, he persuades himself that it is the strongest, and is able to stick to his belief even when the facts are overwhelmingly against him. Nationalism is power-hunger tempered by self-deception. Every nationalist is capable of the most flagrant dishonesty, but he is also — since he is conscious of serving something bigger than himself — unshakeably certain of being in the right.

Now that I have given this lengthy definition, I think it will be admitted that the habit of mind I am talking about is widespread among the English intelligentsia, and more widespread there than among the mass of the people. For those who feel deeply about contemporary politics, certain topics have become so infected by considerations of prestige that a genuinely rational approach to them is almost impossible. Out of the hundreds of examples that one might choose, take this question: Which of the three great allies, the U.S.S.R., Britain and the USA, has contributed most to the defeat of Germany?

In theory, it should be possible to give a reasoned and perhaps even a conclusive answer to this question. In practice, however, the necessary calculations cannot be made, because anyone likely to bother his head about such a question would inevitably see it in terms of competitive prestige. He would therefore start by deciding in favour of Russia, Britain or America as the case might be, and only after this would begin searching for arguments that seemed to support his case. And there are whole strings of kindred questions to which you can only get an honest answer from someone who is indifferent to the whole subject involved, and whose opinion on it is probably worthless in any case. Hence, partly, the remarkable failure in our time of political and military prediction. It is curious to reflect that out of al the ‘experts’ of all the schools, there was not a single one who was able to foresee so likely an event as the Russo-German Pact of 1939(2). And when news of the Pact broke, the most wildly divergent explanations were of it were given, and predictions were made which were falsified almost immediately, being based in nearly every case not on a study of probabilities but on a desire to make the U.S.S.R. seem good or bad, strong or weak. Political or military commentators, like astrologers, can survive almost any mistake, because their more devoted followers do not look to them for an appraisal of the facts but for the stimulation of nationalistic loyalties(3). And aesthetic judgements, especially literary judgements, are often corrupted in the same way as political ones. It would be difficult for an Indian Nationalist to enjoy reading Kipling or for a Conservative to see merit in Mayakovsky, and there is always a temptation to claim that any book whose tendency one disagrees with must be a bad book from a literary point of view. People of strongly nationalistic outlook often perform this sleight of hand without being conscious of dishonesty.

In England, if one simply considers the number of people involved, it is probable that the dominant form of nationalism is old-fashioned British jingoism. It is certain that this is still widespread, and much more so than most observers would have believed a dozen years ago. However, in this essay I am concerned chiefly with the reactions of the intelligentsia, among whom jingoism and even patriotism of the old kind are almost dead, though they now seem to be reviving among a minority. Among the intelligentsia, it hardly needs saying that the dominant form of nationalism is Communism — using this word in a very loose sense, to include not merely Communist Party members, but ‘fellow travellers’ and russophiles generally. A Communist, for my purpose here, is one who looks upon the U.S.S.R. as his Fatherland and feels it his duty t justify Russian policy and advance Russian interests at all costs. Obviously such people abound in England today, and their direct and indirect influence is very great. But many other forms of nationalism also flourish, and it is by noticing the points of resemblance between different and even seemingly opposed currents of thought that one can best get the matter into perspective.

Ten or twenty years ago, the form of nationalism most closely corresponding to Communism today was political Catholicism. Its most outstanding exponent — though he was perhaps an extreme case rather than a typical one — was G. K. Chesterton. Chesterton was a writer of considerable talent who whose to suppress both his sensibilities and his intellectual honesty in the cause of Roman Catholic propaganda. During the last twenty years or so of his life, his entire output was in reality an endless repetition of the same thing, under its laboured cleverness as simple and boring as ‘Great is Diana of the Ephesians.’ Every book that he wrote, every scrap of dialogue, had to demonstrate beyond the possibility of mistake the superiority of the Catholic over the Protestant or the pagan. But Chesterton was not content to think of this superiority as merely intellectual or spiritual: it had to be translated into terms of national prestige and military power, which entailed an ignorant idealisation of the Latin countries, especially France. Chesterton had not lived long in France, and his picture of it — as a land of Catholic peasants incessantly singing the Marseillaise over glasses of red wine — had about as much relation to reality as Chu Chin Chow has to everyday life in Baghdad. And with this went not only an enormous overestimation of French military power (both before and after 1914-18 he maintained that France, by itself, was stronger than Germany), but a silly and vulgar glorification of the actual process of war. Chesterton's battle poems, such as Lepanto or The Ballad of Saint Barbara, make The Charge of the Light Brigade read like a pacifist tract: they are perhaps the most tawdry bits of bombast to be found in our language. The interesting thing is that had the romantic rubbish which he habitually wrote about France and the French army been written by somebody else about Britain and the British army, he would have been the first to jeer. In home politics he was a Little Englander, a true hater of jingoism and imperialism, and according to his lights a true friend of democracy. Yet when he looked outwards into the international field, he could forsake his principles without even noticing he was doing so. Thus, his almost mystical belief in the virtues of democracy did not prevent him from admiring Mussolini. Mussolini had destroyed the representative government and the freedom of the press for which Chesterton had struggled so hard at home, but Mussolini was an Italian and had made Italy strong, and that settled the matter. Nor did Chesterton ever find a word to say about imperialism and the conquest of coloured races when they were practised by Italians or Frenchmen. His hold on reality, his literary taste, and even to some extent his moral sense, were dislocated as soon as his nationalistic loyalties were involved.

Obviously there are considerable resemblances between political Catholicism, as exemplified by Chesterton, and Communism. So there are between either of these and for instance Scottish nationalism, Zionism, Antisemitism or Trotskyism. It would be an oversimplification to say that all forms of nationalism are the same, even in their mental atmosphere, but there are certain rules that hold good in all cases. The following are the principal characteristics of nationalist thought:

Read the full article

Lecture on Nationalism - Romila Thapar

Rabindranath Tagore ― Nationalism in India


OUR REAL PROBLEM in India is not political. It is social. This is a condition not only prevailing in India, but among all nations. I do not believe in an exclusive political interest. Politics in the West have dominated Western ideals, and we in India are trying to imitate you. We have to remember that in Europe, where peoples had their racial unity from the beginning, and where natural resources were insufficient for the inhabitants, the civilization has naturally taken the character of political and commercial aggressiveness. For on the one hand they had no internal complications, and on the other they had to deal with neighbours who were strong and rapacious. To have perfect combination among themselves and a watchful attitude of animosity against others was taken as the solution of their problems. In former days they organized and plundered, in the present age the same spirit continues - and they organize and exploit the whole world.

But from the earliest beginnings of history, India has had her own problem constantly before her - it is the race problem. Each nation must be conscious of its mission and we, in India, must realize that we cut a poor figure when we are trying to be political, simply because we have not yet been finally able to accomplish what was set before us by our providence.

This problem of race unity which we have been trying to solve for so many years has likewise to be faced by you here in America. Many people in this country ask me what is happening as to the caste distinctions in India. But when this question is asked me, it is usually done with a superior air. And I feel tempted to put the same question to our American critics with a slight modification, 'What have you done with the Red Indian and the Negro?' For you have not got over your attitude of caste toward them. You have used violent methods to keep aloof from other races, but until you have solved the question here in America, you have no right to question India.

In spite of our great difficulty, however, India has done something. She has tried to make an adjustment of races, to acknowledge the real differences between them where these exist, and yet seek for some basis of unity. This basis has come through our saints, like Nanak, Kabir, Chaitanya and others, preaching one God to all races of India.

In finding the solution of our problem we shall have helped to solve the world problem as well. What India has been, the whole world is now. The whole world is becoming one country through scientific facility. And the moment is arriving when you also must find a basis of unity which is not political. If India can offer to the world her solution, it will be a contribution to humanity. There is only one history - the history of man. All national histories are merely chapters in the larger one. And we are content in India to suffer for such a great cause.

... Continue Reading

Friday, April 28, 2017

James Baldwin on Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr.


CeCe Winans — Never Have to Be Alone

Bryant Jackson-Green — Criminal Justice Reform For The Skeptics

Bryant Jackson-Green is the criminal justice reform policy analyst with the Illinois Policy Institute, a free market think tank based in Chicago.

(The Daily Caller) Though criminal justice reform is having a moment of increasing bipartisan support, not all conservatives are convinced. Those who lived through the high-crime eras of the ’70s and ’80s are unsure whether reducing sentences, even for low-level drug offenses, would be the wisest way to protect the largely declining crime rates the U.S. has enjoyed over the last 25 years.

But one critical fact about the criminal justice system should give even skeptics reason to support some reforms: 95 percent of inmates in our nation’s prisons eventually will be released. That’s more than 650,000 people each year who, if they can’t get jobs and become productive citizens, are far more likely to recidivate. Each one who commits a new crime represents not only a new public-safety threat, but also a steep cost to taxpayers as another corrections-system round kicks into gear. Even those who oppose sentencing reforms should see the financial and moral good in re-entry policies that enable former offenders to support themselves.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/17/criminal-justice-reform-for-the-skeptics/#ixzz4fXcUuqBF

Dr. Alan Keyes ― Is Trump reverting to America's type?

(Renew America)

During the past week or so, President Trump repeatedly set himself at odds with candidate Trump, frankly acknowledging that his campaign rhetoric was out of touch with reality. In every instance, the reversal brought him more into line with the Democrat/RINO left-leaning political culture he made a "huge" show of adamantly opposing during his run for the presidency. Of course, his decision to attack Syria was chief among these reversals, winning him praise from his most virulent critics, including the likes of Nancy Pelosi.

None of these reversals (I would call them "reversions to type") give much comfort to the conservatives his anti-establishment posing defrauded of their votes. All the reversals contradicted the anti-internationalist, anti-interventionist, go-it-alone "America-first" temperament he used to appeal to their resentment against the GOP's elitist faction leaders. Add the clear signs of surrender to the LGBTQ agenda (
at the urging of his daughter Ivanka and her husband, but in line with Trump's lifelong cultural disposition), and it has clearly been "cold shower" time for self-professed conservatives who said Trump could be trusted, including early bellwethers like Ann Coulter and Pat Buchanan.

True conservatives, committed to preserving our nation's basis in God-endowed right
and the Constitution constructed upon it, ought indeed to be deeply troubled by President Trump's steady retreat from his forward positions on issues of fundamental principle and constitutional integrity. Such issues include the notion that enforceable "rights" should attach to the growing list of sexual identities rooted in the shifting sands of personal self-perception and appetite. The abandonment of the God-endowed standard of right arising from the obligations inherent in the principles by which our Creator serves and preserves the existence of humanity, poses an existential threat to our decent liberty and the decent way of life liberty allows us to pursue.

Stephen L. Carter ― 21,000 Reasons Scalia Was Right

(Bloomberg View)


In the seven counties that used the Hinton State Laboratory, where Dookhan worked, one in four drug convictions over a 10-year period relied on her work. She was, as they say, a big deal. So swiftly did Dookhan work that her colleagues called her Superwoman. They never suspected that she was winning by cheating.

How Jehovah's Witness BAN in Russia can QUICKLY happen in the U.S. and other nations

The Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia have just been labeled an extremist group and dubbed no different that ISIS. WHAT!? The group's bank accounts in Russia have already been frozen and most Kingdom Halls, where members gather for services and prayer, have ceased activity. Where local chapters have remained operating, an intimidatory police presence is being felt, said spokesman for Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia, Yaroslav Sivulskiy.