From The Mailbag — Define Marxism

I had a smart arse BLM dimwit demand I give her a definition of Marxism after I kept insisting that BLM was Marxist. It seems that she thought I was just throwing around words and didn’t know what I was saying.

So… I decided to indulge her. Here is my answer.


Marxism is based on a materialistic and atheistic philosophy that embraces the Hegelian dialectic (thesis/antithesis/ synthesis) as divorced from Hegel’s Idealism and uses the dialectic as its means to realize “progress.” Its intent is the arrival of Utopia and its effect is to level all distinctions into an egalitarian social order wherein there is no longer an oppressor vs. oppressed paradigm existing. Its result wherever it has been tried in history is rivers of blood as the state forces Utopia on unwilling men and women. Its chief technique in seizing power is terror. It is constantly at war with distinctions since distinctions violate their envisioned egalitarian order. Having no extra-mundane personal transcendent God Marxism practices moral relativism. Right and wrong are completely determined by the State in which men live and move and have their being. As such what is right today could very well be wrong tomorrow depending on the necessities of the State. (As seen during the WW II era when one minute the comrades are violently opposing the National socialists in Germany and then the next moment they are singing the praises of their Nazi allies and then flipping again to denounce the Fascists.) Marxism holds to the community of goods as seen in its maxim, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Historically speaking this has included women and wives so that women are considered property of the state to be passed around as needed. (See Alexandra Kollontai) The epistemology of Marxism is humanistic reason. The axiology of Marxism is the progress of the Soviet man. The Ontology of Marxism is time plus chance plus circumstance. The teleology of Marxism is the Kingdom of man.

Well, I could give you a good deal more but this should help you in your studies. I would recommend reading several books I have read if you want to learn more.

Francis Nigel Lee — Communist Eschatology

Fred Schwarz — You Can Trust The Communists to be Communists

W. Cleon Skousen — The Naked Communist

Alexander Solzhenitsyn — From Under the Rubble

Igor Shafarevich — The Socialist Phenomenon

When you get through with those come back to me and I’ll give you some more homework.

Or you could just get your undergrad degree in political philosophy like I did.

I trust your reading goes well.

OVERTURE 36 from Chesapeake Presbytery; “Appoint Study Committee re White Supremacy”

When it comes to Liberal and Mainline denominations I seldom bother anymore to point out the Cultural Marxism or anti-Christ practices or philosophy that they embrace. What with the PCA Revoice Conferences, the Feminism emanating from the OPC, the R2K seen in the URC, and  Federal Vision in the CREC I about at the point of not bothering anymore to point out the Cultural Marxism or anti-Christ practices or philosophy in the “Conservative” and “Reformed” denominations.

Find below an overture from Chesapeake Presbytery of the PCA. For those not in the know, a Presbytery is a group of Churches all belonging to the same denomination as located in a similar geographic setting. Now Chesapeake Presbytery consists of Churches in the Baltimore and Annapolis area. As such I guess we shouldn’t be surprised churches in this area of the country tilting to the left given how far left Baltimore and Annapolis are in general.

However, this overture rises right out of the worldview of Cultural Marxism and Critical Race theory. There is nothing biblical or Christian about it except the Scripture which they wrench out of context and misapply. I don’t even think the Southern Baptists in their various overtures like this have been this bad.

Let’s take a peek at the overture.

Chesapeake Presbytery Overtures (CPO)

4 Whereas, all of mankind, men and women, are made in the image of God (Gen. 1.27) and

5 all fall short of the glory of God (Rom 3.23); and

7 Whereas, Jesus invites all to come unto him (Matt 11.28); and
9 Whereas, there is no man, woman, Jew, Gentile, but are one in Christ (Gal 3.28); and


BLMc responds,

There are zero Biblical Christians in the world who disagree with anything that is said above. The problem isn’t in the citation of Scripture. The problem is the way these clerics are applying Scripture.

Let’s take the last one for example. The Chesapeake Presbytery is suggesting that because St. Paul writes what he writes there, therefore the Church is duty-bound not to notice race just as apparently the church is duty-bound not to notice the sex of the parishioners. After all just as there is neither Greek nor Jew neither are there male and female.

Here in Galatians 3 St. Paul DOES affirm the distinctions of class, race, and gender. Paul is saying that despite these very real distinctions that exist that when it comes to Justification the ground at the cross is even. The very real distinctions that exist don’t prohibit one from being justified in Christ. However, being justified by Christ doesn’t make the distinctions go away — no not even in the Church. Once redeemed in Christ we remain redeemed men and women, freemen and slave, and Jew and Greek. Redemption doesn’t make creational categories disappear.

CPO writes,11 Whereas, the Apostle James teaches that the Church should not be governed nor guided by

12 partiality, even more so that such partiality is a sin (James 2.1, 9); and


BLMc responds,

Do these clerics realize what they have said here? No partiality? No partiality ever…. at all? Partiality is always a sin?

Doesn’t the Church teach that boys should be partial to girls and girls should be partial to boys when it comes to marriage partners? Doesn’t the Church teach that its members should be partial to righteousness over sin? Doesn’t the Church show partiality when it disciplines one member for sinful behavior but not another when that sinful behavior isn’t present?

James’s point is NOT that Church should never be governed by partiality. James’s point, as seen clearly from the text, is that the wrong kind of partiality is always wrong. The fact that clerics from a group of Reformed Churches can’t get that basic exegesis right is shocking.


14 Whereas, racism, more generally, and white supremacy, more particularly, are forms of the
15 sin of partiality, and creates a constructed hierarchy that is not found anywhere in

16 Scripture, and wrongly cultivates castes of superiors and inferiors; and

BLMc responds,

Here we get to the meat of the matter. What we have going on here is the desire of the Chesapeake Presbytery to virtue signal. Can anyone really believe that there is one PCA church in America that has a problem with white supremacy? Oh… sure, if you want to define white supremacy the way the Cultural Marxists define it then it is likely the case that every PCA church in America has a problem with white supremacy. 

And therein lies one of the major problems of this whole overture. Chesapeake Presbytery never defines what white supremacy is. Neither does it define what racism is unless they are actually saying that partiality of any kind is by definition “racism.” Do they really believe that partiality equals racism? Jesus called 12 Jewish men to be His disciples. Was Jesus being racist in this partiality or maybe even a misogynist? The church in Acts set apart 7 men with Greek names to satisfy the complaint of the Greek Hellenist Jews about being shorted in the daily distribution. Was this an example of partiality and so racism? Jesus actually cast a racial epithet at a  Syrophoenician Woman (Mark offers “Canaanite woman”) calling her a dog and communicating that the children are to be preferred saying, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Was Jesus committing the sin of partiality and so racism here? St. Paul in Romans 9 showing partiality apparently commits the sin of racism when he writes, “For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race.” St. Paul doesn’t say this about any other peoples. Is St. Paul guilty of the sin of partiality and so racism? Is St. Paul, and Jesus both guilty of Hebrew Supremacism?

If partiality equals racism and the Chesapeake Presbytery desires to condemn all partiality as racism then we are looking at Jesus and St. Paul being condemned by the PCA. But as Jesus and St. Paul, by the Chesapeake Presbytery definition, were not white supremacists but only Hebrew supremacists then I imagine it is all good.


18 Whereas, we have position papers on groups like freemasonry, relationships between the
19 spheres of the church and state, and frameworks like theonomy; and
21 Whereas, we have more recent papers presented by ad interim committees on women in the 22 church, race and reconciliation and human sexuality; and
24 Whereas, our denomination’s history traces its lines through this difficult and complex issue 25 in the United States of America; and
27 Whereas, our recent national events reveal both the ripples of, existing tensions between, and 28 deep wounds within; and

30 Whereas, the historical roots and current tensions within families, churches, and communities 31 are causing disruption and discord in congregations; and

BLMc responds,

It is the Chesapeake Presbytery, practicing Cultural Marxist thinking that is the only one causing disruption and discord in congregations. It is the Chesapeake Presbytery as it has embraced Critical Race Theory (as seen by the mere existence of this Overture) that is causing disruption and discord in congregations. 

The usage of this kind of overture has one purpose and one purpose only and that is to continue the ongoing guilting of Christian white people. Oh, the CPO gives a requisite nod to “racism in general” but by going after “White Supremacism particularly” we see from the CPO that these clerics are really verklempt with how terrible white Christians are.


33 Whereas, we lack a cohesive theological exposition and clear pastoral advice on this topic for 34 the churches in our Assembly; and
36 Whereas, previous study reports encouraged presbyteries and sessions to consider how to
37 make progress toward racial reconciliation within their contexts; and
39 Therefore, be it resolved that the 48th General Assembly authorize the Moderator to appoint 40 a study committee, comprised of teaching and ruling elders, that would consider the
41 relevant biblical and theological materials and consult with knowledgeable persons
42 such as historians and social scientists, in order to:
44 a. Provide biblical and theological exposition relevant to the topic of White

45 Supremacy;

BLMc responds,

1.) Is it ok if we consult with theologians as well as historians and social scientists?

2.) You will notice now that the issue of “racism” has been completely dropped. It had earlier made an appearance in the overture. Now the issue is solely “White Supremacy.” Apparently only white Christians have this problem of Supremacy. Apparently there is no such thing as “Black Supremacy,” or “Brown Supremacy,” or “Yellow Supremacy.” Nope, only “White Supremacy” is a problem that has to have a study committee spending 15K to look at. This tells me that the Chesapeake Presbytery has already bought into the narrative that only white people have this problem because only white people have power plus privilege. If other races don’t have power plus privilege per the current Cultural Marxist narrative then it is not possible for them to be either racist or take Supremacists stances.

CPO finishes with details.

1 b. Consider the historical background and impact regarding this topic;

BLMc responds,

Here is where they can come back with historical distortions on “slavery,””lynching,” “Jim Crow,” “Segregation,” and “Red-lining.” On all these we will get the Cultural Marxist narrative that seeks to guilt white Christians into appeasement.

CP finishes this overture from Cultural Marxist hell,

3 c. Report to the 49th General Assembly the conclusion of their work and present any
4 relevant recommendations for the understanding and use of sessions and
5 presbyteries in the PCA;
7 d. Set the budget for the study committee at $15,000/year and that funds be derived
8 from gifts to the Administrative Committee designated for that purpose, of which
9 Columbia Presbyterian Church will contribute $1000 toward that proposed budget.
11 Approved by Chesapeake Presbytery at its stated meeting March 13, 2021

12 Attested by /s/ RE Timothy M. Persons, stated clerk


Aren’t there any other clergy members in America besides me sick of this bilge

Derek Chauvin’s Conviction and The Implication

The George Floyd apotheosis is now complete. The LEO who touched this demigod Floyd has been tried and found guilty on all counts by a jury that deliberated all of ten hours.

Apparently, it doesn’t matter when it is a fentynl junkie black demigod who has died — even when the demigod’s heart had more blockage than the 1964 Green Bay Packers running a fullback sweep. And let’s not forget that the demigod Floyd per the Coroners testimony had zero bruising on his neck. Despite all this justice must be done.

The black demigod Floyd who was also a porn star, with a violent criminal past who had a dosage of fentanyl in his system that could kill an elephant, and who was resisting arrest remains a demigod for the minority community and the old debil cracker Derek Chauvin got what all white people deserve.  After all, justice must be done.

Ah yes justice… sweet justice. The kind of justice that ignores jury tampering by the Mayor of Minneapolis, US Congress-creature Maxine Watters and Puppident Joe Biden. All who pitched in before the jury arrived at the verdict insisting that the jury could only reach one “sucks to be a white male” conclusion.  Judge Peter Cahill made sure that justice was done when he refused to declare a mistrial after clear jury tampering was enaged in by the Mayor of the City where the trial was taking place, a major leader in Congress, as well as the freaking Puppident of this bannana Republic.

We’ve seen this kind of justice before. In 1993 the demigod Rodney King’s old debil Cops were on trial and justice in that trial found all four Cops not-guilty. But not to fear, Justice be thinking about demigod Rodney King and via the FEDS swept in and in defiance of the illegality of double jeopardy tried them four old debil white Cops again in a Federal court and this time got the verdict they wanted for two of dem old white debil Cops.

Justice visited again in 1994 when that old debil white Cop Mark Fuhrman be tampering with evidence trying to frame demigod O. J. Simpson for killing two crackers. You gotta love how consistent justice is in our old debil white privilege and systemic racism culture.

If we take a step back from all this (or even half a step) it becomes clear that white people are having done to them now what was done to white people in South Africa before it finally succumbed to racial marxism. From a half a step back one sees the pattern that includes the history that belongs to white people being removed from the public square, the indicting and attempt to publicly shame white people for every real and manufactured incident imaginable, the infamous and completely bogus 1619 project, the intensifying of meeting affirmative action quotas in Corporate boardrooms, Government appointments, and Academic placement, and the blaming of white Evangelicals for being obstacles in the push to vaccine everything that moves. This is to  name just a few pieces of evidence that WOKE culture is open season on the Christian white man.

The guilty verdict brought in against Derek Floyd is a conviction lodged against white people everywhere in this country. The proof of this is seen in Puppident Biden’s proclamation following the verdict that “Systemic Racism remains a stain on America.” Chauvin is convicted and yet we White people remain guilty of systemic racism. Chauvin’s guilt is our guilt.

Non Marxist White people (the few that reamain) better wake up and see that the whole idea of justice is only a word used when dealing with white people. Due process is shot to hell as seen by all the jury tampering. Innocent before proven guilty is a non-starter. Does anyone really think that Derek Chauvin received the presumption of innocence? Can anyone believe in the quaint notion of “rule of law?” What we have instead is the kind of mob rule that Samuel Francis warned about when he coined the term “Anarcho-tyranny.” In the current country we are living in the criminal class is allowed anarchy while the law abiding is visited with tyranny. Woe be unto you white man if you fall in the hands of our “judicial system.”

None of what I have said above should suggest that I think Derek Chauvin was a model of police civility. Neither do I think that the cops that beat Rodney King silly were well mannered and erudite. However, when I compare all those LEO’s to the criminals they were dealing with I have to realize that constantly dealing with the criminal class is likely to harden a man against certain behavior that those who don’t work in the jungle find chilling.

In conclusion allow me to state the genius of the WOKE culture in all this. WOKE-ism has so successfully guilted the white man that it can now easily accuse white people of the very thing WOKEism is guilty. WOKE-ism is forever screaming “racism,” and “discrimination,” and they successfully do so as they are full of hatred for and discrimination against the non-Marxist white man. Saul Alinsky would be proud.

Pure Gold Stand Up Comedy Material Emanating From The J & J Vaccine Cancellation

For people who have already had the vaccine it “really doesn’t mean anything. You’re OK.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci
On the halt of Johnson & Johnson’s COVID vaccine

That my friends is stand-up comedy at its finest.

We had to stop using the J & J vaccine because it is killing people but if you already took the J & J vaccine you’re fine. We promise.

That is right up there with “We had to destroy the village to save the village.”

Here is another great comedy routine from a Big Eva personage named Brad Littlejohn.

“The recent J&J vaccine pause should give us all much *greater* confidence in the safety of Covid vaccines. Indeed, it knocks the #1 weapon out of the anti-vaxxers’ hands: the claim that the gov’t is “covering up” the risks of the vaccines.”

This is like saying, “Well, because the Soviets eventually admitted ‘Chernobyl was a small problem,’ therefore we have proof that the USSR is a reliable source for information.”

Then this Littlejohn — this tower of genius — continues his comedy routined by saying,

“Not gonna mince words: anyone who willfully manipulates the J&J pause to undermine public confidence in vaccines, like those who willfully misled the public on the risks of Covid-19, is in violation of the sixth commandment.”

In the famous words of Bugs Bunny; “What a Maroon.” Here is an idiot willfully misleading the public contending that anyone like the gazillion medical and research professionals who have warned people off of the COVID injection (called a “vaccine”)  is violating the 6th commandment.

Hey Brad Littlejohn… go bugger yourself. Anybody who has confidence in these “vaccines” has to be as brain dead as Littlejohn.

Not Getting R. Scott Clark’s Inability to Get The Obvious

“Practically, what does it mean to speak of transforming softball or orchestral music or any other cultural endeavor? Why cannot softball simply be what it is, recreation? What is distinctively Christian about “Christian art” or “Christian history” or Christian math”? I understand that the rhetoric is sacrosanct (a shibboleth, as it were) but what does it signify? What are the particulars? I understand that when we get to ultimate matters, e.g., theology, there is a distinctively Christian view of things and there is certainly a Christian interpretation of the significance of things. That is a Christian worldview properly understood but what does it mean to speak of transforming penultimate things? Is the neo-Kuyperian view related to the Anabaptist vision of nature and grace and if not, how are they essentially different? What if Leonard Verduin intuited something?”

Dr. R. Scott Clark 

Recently, someone left the link to a brief Clark essay wherein this quote was found in the comments section on Iron Ink. The commenter thought this essay proved that Clark was making progress. I disagree.

Clark objects to the idea of grace transforming nature (and so culture) preferring instead to say that grace renews nature in salvation. Clark desires to keep the renewing power of grace constrained to humans as it pertains to their salvation. However, this seems to be a constrained view of reality. After all, it is grace renewed and saved people who are the ones who create culture (an embodiment of nature). If grace renews nature in salvation then grace is going to renew everything that those salvifically renewed people are going to create in culture. One simply can’t have grace renewing nature in salvation without that renewal getting into everything the renewed and salvation visited person touches.  The products of culture, after all, don’t come into being apart from the renewed or unrenewed people who create them. I honestly don’t understand why this is so difficult for R2K Clark and his R2K buds.

Then Clark lists several, what I take are supposed to be real stumpers. as to how grace renews nature (grace transforms culture). Let’s take these one by one.

1.) Softball

I am going to use baseball as an example but it would apply to softball as well. Baseball just gives me more at-hand examples.

In 2017 the Houston Astros (Baseball) won the World Series. Sometime afterward it was revealed that the Astros won the World Series by the art of cheating as they were stealing signs. Several key team leaders lost their jobs and the team itself was fined $5 million for this cheating scandal. Allow me to propose to Dr. Clark that Christian baseball vis-a-vis non-Christian baseball would be less inclined to have this problem.

If Dr. Clark doesn’t like this example we could note that non-Christian baseball has seen performing-enhancing drugs be a huge issue in the recent past providing a barrier to Barry Bonds, Rafael Palmerio, and Roger Clemens gaining entry to the Baseball Hall of Fame. They are each in essence guilty of playing non-Christian baseball.

We could go on to give examples of Ty Cobb sharpening his spikes so that when he slid into 2nd base he would cut up the Shortstop covering the bag. We could write about Pete Rose paying the penalty for playing non-Christian baseball by violating the rules against gambling while a player.

Let’s pretend that genuine Reformation visited Major League Baseball. Does Dr. Clark actually believe that grace would not renew nature so that grace transformed baseball culture?

2.) Orchestral Music

Francis Schaeffer in this work  “The God Who is There,” spends some time looking at the Orchestral music of composer John Cage and demonstrates how Cage’s orchestral music was a declaration that the cosmos was the product of time plus chance. Cage’s music communicated that there was no meaning. This would be non-Christian Orchestral music and it is again difficult to understand how Clark can find this concept difficult. Is what Cage did in music akin to what Bach did in music?

3.) Art

Clark wants to know what makes Christian art, Christian. First, let us note there that the artist as God’s image-bearer cannot avoid getting their worldview into their art. Every piece of art means something and the meaning of that Art is going to determine whether the art in question is Christian or non-Christian or a mixture of both.

Second, art typically aims at beauty. Beauty is an objective category as existing in different genres. Art exists along an objective scale in those different genres of ugly to beautiful. The more beautiful a piece of art is the more Christian that art is and vice-versus.

It would seem that when we compare the modern art of a woman pushing paintballs out of her vagina onto a canvas (yes… that is a thing) and compare that to Rembrandt’s “The Night Watch,” or Monet’s “Water Lilies,” we would have to say that inasmuch as Rembrandt and Monet were going after beauty their work more closely approached Christian than pushing paintballs out of a human orifice on to a canvas.

4.) History

This one is a little breathtaking as history is really nothing but theology told in another venue. Does Clark not realize that a period of history as handled by the Marxist Historians Charles and Mary Beard is going to look and read very differently than that same period of history as covered by the Christian Historian C. Gregg Singer?

History is Christian or not Christian depending on the presuppositions that the historian has who is approaching the time period they are writing upon. I expect Nesta Webster or Edmund Burke as Christians to tell me a different story about the French Revolution than I expect to be told by Simon Schama or Albert Sobul. When I read the accounts of the American era of Reconstruction I expect a different report from the Dunning School than I expect to read from the Marxist “historian” Eric Foner.

5.) Math

Clark in all likelihood believes that Math is impervious to Christian or non-Christian categories. However perhaps Clark hasn’t heard of one Kareem Carr?

Harvard PhD student Kareem Carr’s recently had a dialogue about the abstract nature of mathematics and it was profiled by Popular Mechanics in an article entitled “Why Some People Think 2+2=5…and why they’re right.”

Carr’s “hope is that you understand the flexible relationship between our mathematical systems, our perceptions of the world, and the symbolic manipulations we use to reason about reality.

Note what is being said here is that mathematics is a social construct. There is nothing in objective in mathematics.  Any such reasoning gives us non-Christian mathematics.

So, pace Dr. Clark we do see that these matters can be handled either in a Christian manner or a non-Christian manner. Frankly, it is bewildering to me at least how any educated man could not readily see this. It’s like not readily noticing the oddity of tits on a boar.

However, the oddity does not end here for Dr. Clark. He goes on to say above that;

“I understand that when we get to ultimate matters, e.g., theology, there is a distinctively Christian view of things and there is certainly a Christian interpretation of the significance of things.”

What else is baseball, orchestral music, art, history, and math but “things?” And if they are “things” then why should there not be a Christian view of these things? Another theologian who shared the same last name as our erstwhile Escondido novice wrote a book a generation ago titled “A Christian View of Men and Things.” Gordon Clark realized that all things were at their heart theological. This is something that seems to escape Dr. R. Scott Clark. Maybe Scott should pick up Gordon’s book and give it a read. Maybe then he would understand?