Doug Wilson on Ann Coulter … McAtee on Wilson

Over here, the barely conservative Doug Wilson chimes in on a Ann Coulter tweet,

Ann Coulter and the Disease of American Conservatism

I agree with Doug that American Conservatism is diseased but I also think there is some disease in Doug’s reasoning on this piece.

Doug starts off by saying that Ann Coulter has done good work and then goes on to give her tweet  to which he so strenuously objects,

“I don’t care if @realDonaldTrump wants to perform abortions in White House after this immigration policy paper. http://bit.ly/1EvT3Ja”

Doug then concedes that Coulter was using hyperbole here, in the cause of supporting Trump’s immigration policy. Doug complains though that, “what she is willing to say represents the central confusion of American conservatism.” And then offers this question,

What are we conserving? America or that which makes America worth conserving?

Maybe there is a third answer to this question that Doug does not consider. Maybe the answer to this question is that we are conserving the time and space that is needed for us to exist so that we might more thoroughly repent. Doug needs to be reminded that dead people don’t repent. And so while our mad border-less immigration pursuit is only a symptom of a far greater disease it is a symptom that must be dealt with now so that the patient lives long enough to be cured of the disease. It could be the case that to say what Coulter says above is to say in effect, “I know we need to repent but if we don’t craft a sane immigration policy we, as a people, will be aborted before we can repent.”

Doug then puts all kinds of words in Coulter’s mouth which I’m sure she would say is a misrepresentation of her intent, Doug writes,

“Put another way, oh, how I wish God would govern the world in ways other than the ways He has revealed to us in Scripture. I don’t care if we sow the wind in the White House, I just care that we don’t reap the whirlwind on our borders (Hos. 8:7). I don’t care if we mock God in the White House, just so long as God does not visit us elsewhere with the consequences of mocking Him (Gal. 6:7). I don’t care if we are deserving the wages of sin in the White House, just so long as we don’t have to actually do any dying (Rom. 6:23).”

Now, I am not a shill for the neo-conservative Coulter but neither am I a shill for the neo-con Wilson but in this case, I think Coulter is correct. She is not saying all that Wilson puts in her mouth above. She is merely using hyperbole to say that, “all things being equal if I had to choose between the dangers to this country that immigration represents and the dangers to this country that abortion represents I’d choose immigration.”

And, in this case, Coulter is correct. The current attempt to create a borderless nation (an oxymoron if there ever was one) guarantees turning what remains of this nation into a third world hell hole where death and disease would be so familiar that the days when deaths by abortions were considered “shocking” would be seen as the “good old days.” If you doubt this go visit the high-density suburbs of a third world country. Now add to this that a borderless country guarantees a Tyrannical government that will give us the usual “Death by Government” numbers that tyrannies always give and one begins to see the sense of what Coulter is saying.

Coulter is not saying that abortion is good. She is merely saying that open borders is so bad that it makes abortion look good.

Wilson is correct that what is needed is a boatload of repenting but repenting also includes the idea of repenting that we desire to commit ethnocide and Christocide by an open borders policy that is nothing but an insane policy of pursuing the death of both a people and a faith. Repentance includes not throwing ourselves on the bonfires of the NWO with its white-hot intense hatred for all things Christian and for all those who have, through the centuries, been the bearers of Christ.

Wilson is correct that we deserve the judgment of plague, pestilence, and poverty against us for our sin but perhaps by pursuing a sane immigration policy God is going to give us space to later repent even more? Doug doesn’t know God’s mind that a sane immigration policy might be God’s mercy to us to repent more deeply at a later time for the sins of our defiance against Him.

The diseased conservatism that Doug champions think that because we cannot yet be cured of the disease (rebellion against God) that we should not be given time or space by God that our children and grandchildren might come to their senses and repent for our high handed sins.

I hate this country as much as Doug does for its sins against God … sins that cry out for justice. But I also love this nation enough to pray like Habakkuk of old,

LORD, I have heard the report about You and I fear. O LORD, revive Your work in the midst of the years, In the midst of the years, make it known; In wrath remember mercy.

“Oh Faithful, Merciful and Just God we plead for the sake of Christ that you might be pleased to give us repentance. For those who refuse to repent and who adorn our nations’ life with the vile, the ugly, and the psychotic we pray that you would arise and crush them. We beg of you to bring upon them the burning, cutting, and torture they have brought upon the ‘least of these.’ We plead Father against the apathetic who are content with their personal peace and affluence that you might afflict them and awaken their conscience and if they refuse to be awakened we pray that you would visit them with the boils of Job. O great God for the bureaucrat and politician who makes the machinery of wickedness function smoothly we pray for restoration but if they will not be restored Father, we ask that you might make them now bureaucrats and politicians in Hell so that a righteous person might take their place. We plead with thee that you might defend thy own name, reputation, and honour by cleansing our land and causing us to repent in dust and ashes for the wickedness for which we are clearly responsible and in which we delight.

Make the Name of thy Son, the Lord Christ, a name to be both feared and cherished again.

In Christ’s name, we pray

From Classical Marxism to Cultural Marxism — One Doctrinal Transmutation

 
 
    In one of his works, “The German Ideology,” Marx expands on what life will be like in the “free” communist paradise where division of labor as found in Capitalism, is finally abolished:
 
    “For as soon as the distribution of labour comes into being, each man has a particular, exclusive sphere of activity, which is forced upon him and from which he cannot escape. He is a hunter, a fisherman, a herdsman, or a critical critic, and must remain so if he does not want to lose his means of livelihood; while in communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.”
   
Now with the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989 many Marxists have given up on Marx’s promise of each and every man being a renaissance man that is an accomplished cattle rancher one day, a first class huntsmen the next day, a concerto violinists the following day and a Olympic member of the Soviet hockey team the next. However, this doctrine has not gone away as it has been inherited by the Cultural Marxists. Indeed, this doctrine has merely been transmuted. While the cultural Marxist may not embrace the polymath myth of his classical Marxist forbear he does embrace a similar myth of pansexualism.  Cultural Marxism holds out the promise that a being can one day be a man, and the next day be a woman, and the next day be a transgender male that is a Lesbian and the next day can be a newt. Just as classical Marxism held out the promise to all men that they each could be Renaissance men so the cultural Marxist holds out the promise to all men that they can be accomplished in any and all perversions they desire. The elimination of distribution of set labor so that each could do all as found in the classical Marxist model has been transmuted in the elimination of distribution of set sexuality so that each can sexually be all.
 
    The implicit existentialism found in the nonsense that all men, in a Communist Marxist model, could be masters of everything according to their whim is now the implicit existentialism as found in the nonsense that men, in a Cultural Marxist model , can be masters of gender according to their revolving whim of desires.

Hillary’s Confession

 

“Look, I don’t believe you change hearts, I believe you change laws, you change allocation of resources, you change the way systems operate. You’re not going to change every heart. You’re not.”

Hillary Rodham-Clinton

1.) This is as clear of a confessional statement in regards to social engineering as you will ever find. Hillary is admitting here that change does not come via persuasion but rather by brute Governmental force.  The Government is the Potter and the citizenry is the clay and those who handles the pulleys and levers of the Government change people by changing their environment via legislative, executive and judicial diktat.  People then change not because they are persuaded but because they are forced.

2.) This heavy emphasis has a theological origin. Theologically people are seen, in this theology, not as free moral agents but rather as those who are behaviorally conditioned and who are responding to a top down stimuli. In this worldview Hillary and the Government is the mad scientist and the citizenry is the Pavlovian dog made to salivate upon being conditioned by Governmental decree.

3.) This attitude also conveys the attitude of legal positivism. Law is not discovered. Law does not belong to some objective transcendent order that exists to be discovered and bowed to. Law, instead, is created by humans as a tool to shape other humans. Law is subjective to the ever shifting need of the zeitgeist.

4.) This is the mindset of most of our politicians and it is the mindset of tyranny. Seize the reins of power.  Rule in a top down fashion. View the citizenry as clay to be  molded at the magistrates command. Change the way systems operate so that those in those systems are forced to comply. Resistance is futile. The citizenry will be assimilated.

A Short Brief on the Consequences of Sex without Borders

A social order trajectory that begins with unconstrained libidinous passion will end in social order horror that consumes individuals, families, and nations. For example the French intelligentsia philosophes, emodied and led by the Marquis de Sade, embarked on the trajectory of emancipating the sexual impulse from the moral order and the end result was the tender strokes of Madame la’ Guillotine. What began as a loosening of sexual mores ended with the loosening of heads off of shoulders.

Consider also, as example, the Weimar Republic of the 1920’s. What began as the Sexual cabaret of Europe in the 1920’s where every kind of fetish and deviance possible could be had for the right price ended with unnamed tyranny and finally, rampant death for the “fatherland.”

Consider also the Bolshevik Revolution. Alexandera Kollentai led the way in sexual freedom for women. Women, under communist rule, were considered as belonging to no man but as belonging to the state for purchase. Kollontai, with Lenin’s approval, sought to destroy the concept of marriage and families. The results of this sexual freedom was so disastrous that even the Communist realized that they had to reverse course lest they wipe themselves out by sexual freedom.

Consider America and its “sexual revolution” ginned up by the huge tax free foundations supporting the completely fallacious “science” of Alfred Kinsey, and then promulgated by pervert carnival barker pamphleteers like Hugh Hefner. Since the American “sexual revolution” blood has flowed to the tune of scores of millions of lives of the living but not yet and never would be born.

There is a nexus between the liberation of sex from God ordained expression and the consequent social order blood in the streets that naturally follows. We are witnessing that again in the West as we seek to eliminate any boundaries for sex. It almost seems that there is a principle at work here — a truism that demonstrates that unfettered sex outside God’s boundaries of marriage, guarantees unlimited death.

Not only is it the case though that sex without borders ends in rivers of blood, but it is also the case that sex without borders makes for Governments without restrictions. When a people become perverted by sex there no longer is any impulse to hold Government officials accountable in their never ending work of enlarging the scope of the State. A perverted and guilty people are in no position to hold accountable perverted and guilty Politicians and bureaucrats. In point of fact, the state recognizes this, and realizes it is in their best interest to pervert the citizenry since such a course of action guarantees, for them, their ability to not be held accountable for their perversion of power and corruption.

Finally, sex without borders works to pressure our daughters into women of ill reputation and our sons into the effete. This is the consequence of widespread cultural perversion working to conform all in its  path. Modesty and masculinity are both redefined in a perverted direction. Libidinous sex becomes the defining aspect of such a culture where sex has no border and all are defined and identified in terms of their relation to the sexual zeitgeist.