Category: Culture

The Creeping Surveillance State

Was talking to a friend who told me a story about a family member. Said family member was connected to information that is now considered important to the FEDS. Said family member was contacted by representatives of a foreign government about this information. The family member in question told them, “I have no interest in talking to you.” Later, same family member was in the White House to discuss this information and in the discussion they admitted that they were contacted by these representatives of a foreign Government though they told the representatives to “push off.”

The Feds replied … “Yeah, we know.”

Then today I viewed Tucker Carlson’s recent conversation covering the rise of the Surveillance state abetted by technology that is multiplying across these united States. This interview reinforced how it is that the FEDS could’ve known about this otherwise private encounter noted in the first paragraph.

Bottom line … we are (all of us) constantly under surveillance by our “Masters.” We are living in a slave state and it is only going to get worse. The kind of monitoring system that is now in place and is yet to be set up in its fullness will make the Stasi ability in E. Germany to do surveillance on its citizenry (really subjects) look like children playing pretend.

Of course, throughout history this has always been one marker of a tyrant state. The structuring of all this has happened right under our noses and all without even pretending to ask, via a vote, if we wanted to be surveilled.

I remember several years ago when in Sunday School we were discussing a controversial subject and suddenly a couple guys said, “wait a minute, I have to go put my phone in the car.” I thought they were joking but they seriously did not want their phone around while discussing something controversial. They knew, even a couple years ago (or they intuited) that they could be under surveillance.

The rational for all this camera/phone/drone surveillance is “safety.” Those manufacturers of the technology (Flock Group Inc.) who are profiting from all this insist that this is good for America because it reduces crime. The problem here is that there are no stats that it is having that impact.

Of course this is all very Orwellian. It is Orwell’s incarnation of “in the State you will live, and move, and have your being.”

Do not think you are safe from all this. If there is one thing a tyrant state does well is that it constantly increases the demand for conformity. Surveillance is how that conformity is achieved. “Resistance is futile,” they can now say, “you will all be assimilated.”

The Carlson interview made it clear that the reason for all this surveillance is “safety.” This need for “safety” is the very rationale the NAPARC churches are using in crafting their statements against Christian Nationalism. “We must denounce even Biblical Nationalism because Nationalism is a threat to our safety.” The denominational mechanisms are not concerned about the safety of church members. They are concerned to create group think on this subject. That is the same goal of our FED overlords, “Safety, Safety, Safety.” In such bleating is hidden the work of tyrants, both in the NAPARC denominations and in the Federal Government.

It is clear that technology, while clearly having many advantages, will be used to toss us all into a giant FEMA camp. There will be no need for fences, or barracks because the whole nation (and even world) will be one giant FEMA camp. The fences will be provided by the ever expanding technology and every home (if you can afford one) will serve as a barracks. You can be sure that a social credit system, such as they already have in China, will, inch by inch, be forced upon us. Consider, for example, the legislation already passed to have cameras in every automobile scanning your face all the time to make sure that you are safe and it is safe to everyone else that you are on the road. All hail safety.

Of course, this could all be stopped if we would only own Christ as King, both individually and as a people. Having abandoned the Kingship of Jesus Christ we have created a vacuum that the State has now filled. The cure for all this malevolence by the FEDS is not found primarily first in armed uprisings. The cure for all this malevolence is found first in repentance. We are here because we, both individually and corporately, are in bondage to sin and bondage to sin always works itself out in eventually being a people in bondage to the State. We are slaves to the State because we are slaves to sin.

Even with all this, I remain optimistic that the Surveillance State will ultimately fail. I don’t know how long until that failure becomes manifest but it will fail. The reason that I believe the surveillance state will fail is because God has said,

He who sits in the heavens shall laugh;
The Lord shall hold the resisting Kings in derision.
5
Then He shall speak to them in His wrath,
And distress them in His deep displeasure:
6
“Yet I have [e]set My King
[f]On My holy hill of Zion.”

7
“I will declare the [g]decree:
The Lord has said to Me,
‘You are My Son,
Today I have begotten You.
8
Ask of Me, and I will give You
The nations for Your inheritance,
And the ends of the earth for Your possession.
9
You shall [h]break them with a rod of iron;
You shall dash them to pieces like a potter’s vessel.’ ”

Pointing Out The Problem with W2K

“It may seem strange to hear, but the distinction between the gospel and the Christian is an important one. Evangelicals, in particular, are accustomed to a type of gospel mindset where everything is a “gospel issue.” But social change does not come directly from the gospel but from the Christians. In a Christian nation, Immigration issues are not determined by the first four books of the New Testament. Instead, they are made by Christians and their families, working through social and political means, ordering the nation to their earthly and heavenly good.”

Unconscionable Blog

I pulled this quote from the link below,

Machen vs Horton – Christian Nationalism

The article is a comparison between Dr. Mike Horton and Dr. J. Gresham Machen on the subject of Christianity and its impact on surrounding social order. It was not a bad piece over all but it still suffers from the wretched 2K philosophy even when warring against Michael Horton R2K / liberalism.

A few observations,

1.) The writers is spot on when he observes that Evangelicals/Reformed want to make everything a “gospel issue.” Everything is not a gospel issue. Now, one can say that everything is an issue to which Christianity as God’s revelation must apply but that is not the same as saying that everything is a gospel issue. The Gospel deals particularly with the question, “How can one escape the just wrath of God against my sin and guilt?” The Gospel does not deal with the question of the criminal penalty for sexual deviancy, as one example, though Christianity does.

2.) The writer notes the distinction between the Gospel and the Christian. Again, he is correct here. The Christian has to evaluate a multitude of questions that are not answered by “the Gospel,” strictly speaking, as noted above. This is important to repeat again because clergy are forever saying that the most abstruse things are “Gospel issues.” Immigration, for example, is not a “Gospel issue,” (the article linked mentions immigration) but it is an issue that the Scripture speaks to and so can be evaluated on that basis upon a close examination of all that Scripture has to say. However, immigration is no more a Gospel issue than what bedtime you set for your children.

3.) Social change does come from Christians as the writer aptly notes but biblical social change only comes from Christians as they are thinking God’s thoughts after Him as revealed in Scripture and the necessary consequences arising from Scripture.

4.) It is true that immigration policy as championed by Christians can not be made solely by consulting the four gospels. However, it is also true that the immigration policy championed by Christians can be made after consulting all of God’s revelation from Genesis to Revelation.

5.) The writer invokes


“Instead, they (decisions on immigration) are made by Christians and their families, working through social and political means, ordering the nation to their earthly and heavenly good.”

The writer is almost correct here but his failing is found in the emanating scent of 2K thinking. Look at what is said about how we need to order the nation to “our earthly and heavenly good.” Now, upon first blush that sounds noble. However, the fly in the ointment here is found in asking the question, “our heavenly and earthly good, by what standard?” You see, W2K (Wolfean 2 Kingdom) and its fanboys will say the standard by which we measure heavenly and earthly good is by the abstract thing called “Natural Law.” A “natural law” that no two Natural Law movements will agree upon. If we are to order the nation to their earthly and heavenly good that can only be done by resorting to the law and to the testimony – to God’s revealed Word.

I am going to end here with an observation about the current W2K movement. I’ve read some of its recent proponents as well as some of its critics through history. I strongly recommend reading Friedrich Julius Stahl on Natural Law. Having done some reading I do not think W2K will be able to seize the conversation and lead the way because it is so utterly contradictory and confusing. You need a Venn diagram to determine what does and does not order a life or social order to a earthly and heavenly good. The way that some matters are declared “strikes” while other matters are called “balls” is mystifying when deciding when a matter is or is not a ordering to a earthly and heavenly good. This is because W2K has no objective standard. They have no “thus saith the Lord.” It is all subjective. This has always been the fault of Natural Law thinking throughout history.

I would recommend reading the linked article. It does a good job demonstrating that Michael Horton is no J. Gresham Machen and that Horton’s view will do for the church what bad views in marriage do for a marriage.

“Citizen Vigilante”…. A Review

1.) “All behavior can be traced back to instincts.”

Citizen Vigilante
Opening Quote

a.) This is a materialistic view of man and so not true.

b.) All behavior can be traced back to what a man believes as that belief is poured over his ethnicity.

As a man thinketh in his heart so he is.

This opening quote really does set the table for the rest of the film.

2.) In a key scene in the film “Citizen Vigilante” the “hero” paraphrases a line from Nietzsche’s “Thus Spake Zarathrustra” favorably. The essence of the paraphrase is that once someone arrives on the Mountain of wisdom one realizes that all the morality and religion he has been taught is so much bunk. The idea implicit is that the individual makes his own truth. This is the motto of Nietzsche’s Ubermensch. The Nitzschean Ubermensch man is the man strong enough to embrace his own superiority over all lesser beings and then wields “the will to power.” Part of this embrace is the abandonment of all previously imposed (Christian) morals in order to gain a kind of self-realization where the strong do not allow the weak to have power or status over them.

Clearly, there is an appeal to that mindset right now in our culture given the fact that the weak and the lesser men are now being valued over their betters. However, the cure to that is not by abandoning Christianity. The cure is to give up the pietistic Christianity that gave Nietzsche’s philosophy a cash currency. The Nietzschean worldview communicated by “Citizen Vigilante” can only be overcome by a return to Biblical Christianity where Biblical law warns that a turning against the God the Bible and His Christ means that the alien and stranger rise higher than the homeborn. Only Biblical Christianity can defeat the worldview of both the Nietzscheans with their Ubermensch philosophy and the egalitarians with their desire to destroy the white Christian man so as to replace him with anti-Christ equatorials.

3.) One glaring irony in the film “Citizen Vigilante” is that the “hero” while praised for attacking the immigrant community, so as to bring justice to those whose crimes were left unpunished, visits a brothel where he chooses for himself a equatorial woman to be his companion.

The brothel scene only serves to reinforce the Nietzschean “will to power” theme in the film. The Nietzschean “hero” has no morals he has to be consistent with since there is no objective truth to which he must conform. As such, he can at one and the same time, hate the equatorials present in the culture and choose for himself an equatorial madame to use for his pleasure.

Alternately, this scene is in the film in order to communicate the domination of the “hero” over the alien and the stranger. The film maker goes out of his way to show that Sanders (film’s “hero”) bypasses all the white whores he could have chosen in favor of the equatorial he eventually does choose. He intends to dominate one who is dominating his people.

Warning — This bordello scene really adds nothing to the film. I’d strongly advise fast forwarding through this scene. The scene is completely gratuitous except to show the dark character of the hero. It is possible that I missed something in this scene because I took my own advice.

4.) In the “Citizen Vigilante” there is a recurring theme of the “Hero” bringing justice. This is an inconsistency in the film since the film has clearly embraced the Nietzschean theme of “will to power.” In a “Will to power” world there is no such thing as objective justice. What the “hero” is bringing then is not Justice but merely his subjective preference. In the Nietzschean worldview there is no such thing as justice. There is only preference.

Another interesting aspect of this film is the “hero” is always dressed in black. Perhaps the attire is supposed to reflect the black worldview of the protagonist?

Sanders, in this film, is also a bit of an obsessive compulsive as seen in meticulous grooming, business details, and cleanliness fetish (conveyed in the bordello scene). This is interesting because if one has ever known someone with a pronounced obsessive compulsive disorder it is just the kind of person you can imagine going on a vigilante rampage.

5.) The film focuses not only on the unwelcome vicious equatorials. There is also a focus on white magistrates who are not enforcing the law against equatorials or who are pursuing Sanders for his vigilantism. In point of fact there are many more whites killed in this film than there are equatorials. So, the theme in the film is not only that the West is being flooded by vicious equatorials, as communicated in the opening scene of the film. The theme of the film is also that white liberals magistrates need to be visited with vigilante justice. It’s hard to argue against either of these film’s themes. The film, with all its flaws, captures our current state of affairs where the once Christian White West is being flooded with violent equatorials bent on replacing the Christian white man all aided and abetted by our elite class. One feels less sympathy for the Magistrates that Sander’s murders then one does for the equatorials he murders.

6.) The film treats Sanders as a kind of saint. In the bar scene Sanders rescues two white women from two white men who have deceived their dates and who have put a mickey in their drinks in order to make their female dates pliable to their desires. Sander’s rescues the white women from the white men and does so without killing them.

7.) It wouldn’t take much to convince me that the film “Citizen Vigilante” was intended as a parody and satire in order to mock anti-immigration and anti-statist sentiment. The hero is so over the top that it strikes me that a case could be made that the film makers are mocking people who are anti-immigrant and anti-statist. I sure wouldn’t want Sanders representing my opposition to immigration and to corrupt Magistrates.

8.) The film “Citizen Vigilante” is in many respects a snuff film.

9.) It is interesting that the scene in the film “Citizen Vigilante” where the “hero” brings justice to the rape gang finds Sanders coming into a home of immigrants who are sitting around the table having a nice family meal. It all looks very domestic. Mom and Dad Mooselimb having a pleasant family meal with son and daughter Mooselimb.

Your sympathies here, initially, are intended to be with this immigrant family and against this cruel Citizen Vigilante. However, as the story unfolds about what the Mooselimb son did in the gang rape the initial sympathetic portrait of family Mooselimb begins to fade and is replaced with disgust as both the Mooselimb Father and his rapist Mooselimb son speak to Sanders trying to explain and justify the rape. This disgust is accentuated when you learn that daughter Mooselimb had been posting on her social media accounts how the raped girl deserved it since she dressed so provocatively. This scene ends with something like seven or eight executions.

10.) It is laughable that Citizen Vigilante, in this film, is doing all he is doing in order to protect “Democracy.” He complains a couple times in the film how the Magistrates are not protecting the “Democracy.” This is laughable because it is “Democracy” that has created the migration world we are living in. No anti-immigrant person wants to “save” Democracy.

11.) There is a “Javert” type character in the film from Interpol (Henry) who is constantly trying to track down Sanders. Like Javert he seems convinced that he is doing the right thing by protecting all the immigrants from the wrath of Sanders. The Javert character likes to talk about “the rule of law.” The filmgoers are forced to ask, which of the two characters, “Javert” or “Sanders” is really serving “the rule of law?” At one point in the film Henry tells a waitress he is pursuing Sanders so that society doesn’t collapse. This is a hilarious line given that without Sanders work, society is in freefall collapse.

12.) The film includes the popularity of Sanders over the news outlets and social media. Even if Sanders is brought to “justice” his message is beyond the reach of “the law.” Sanders has become a 21st century Robin Hood character and Inspector Henry’s “law” cannot triumph over Sanders.

12.) As bad as the film “Citizen Vigilante” is from both an artistic viewpoint and from a worldview viewpoint, it is interesting that it is getting the traction that it is getting. Clearly, there is a market for anti-immigrant, anti-statist films.

If indeed it is a anti-immigrant and anti-statist film.

“Citizen Vigilante” reminds us that when we let societal problems get out of control solutions that are offered are often a cure that is as bad as the problem. No one desires to live in this garbage can social order we have created with the mass immigration into the West of equatorials. Yet, neither do sane people desire the Nietzschean “will to power” solution that the film offers. Yet, this choice between “the devil and the deep blue sea” is often where a social order ends up when it doesn’t speak immediately and correctly to its social ills. We in the West have come to that place and it is unlikely we are going to find a way out of this death spiral that doesn’t have its own unseemliness about it.

One has to wonder if the popularity of this film will inspire Sanders types to arise and start playing the “Citizen Vigilante?”

Weddings & The Turning of the Wheel

Yesterday I attended a wedding of  one of my cousin’s sons. It left me full of observations.

1.) “What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes.” James 4:14

I was strongly reminded of how fast life passes. You see, over sixty years ago I was a 4 year old ring-bearer in the marriage of the groom’s Grandmother (my aunt). thirty years ago I officiated the marriage of the groom’s mother (my cousin).  Yesterday, I attended the third generation marriage ceremony of the same family line.

Life soon goes by
With the blink of an eye
One generation blooms
While another dies
Another blink of an eye
The sun is rising high
Time is not defied

2.) Individuals come and go but the family goes on forever. I found myself reminiscing about the sanctuaries where these weddings took place over the generations. Grandmother, Mother, and Son all married in different sanctuaries, all having many different family members attending. Many of the family members who attended the grandmother’s wedding are now deceased. Some of the family members who attended the Mother’s wedding are now deceased. Yet despite how the individual family members change out over time the family remains resilient. There will come a time when I am not at one of these family weddings because I am deceased but the family wedding will not be any less a family wedding all because I am not present.  Individuals have a time limit but the family moves through time.

When one is born into a family, one is born into a permanent reality. The names and faces change over the generations but the family remains. This is the generational bond that ties the living with the deceased. We are not our own. We belong to our families and no matter how hard one might try one will forever be who they are because of those familial bonds. The family members my change but the music keeps playing.

3.) In God’s providence the very day of this wedding, marking day one of this marriage I learned that another marriage of 53 years ended because of the unexpected and sudden death of one of the spouses. It made an impact on me to think that on the very same day that one lifelong marriage ended another one had taken its place with its beginning. This in turn reminded me of the nature of community. As with family, as noted above, genuine community is bolted together by the older generations passing down to the younger generations a goodly and godly legacy. Again, one generation falls and another rises but the community remains.

4.) On a different note, I had a cousin inform me that he was taking a course at his church on how to  communicate Christ to someone who is outside the faith. Of course I was encouraged by his taking this course. Quite encouraged. Along the way in this course he is learning about different shades of Christianity, and as such he asked me, “Now are you a Calvinist or an Arminian?” When I told him I was definitely a Calvinist he said … “I knew it!” I was relieved that he knew it.

5.) Sometimes you will hear professional athletes talking about how “the game slowed down for me.” By that they mean they were able to be better at the game because they understood how it worked. I think sometimes in life I am sensing that “the game of life has slowed down for me.” This wedding kind of confirmed that. It’s hard to explain but one gets to the point where they are both participant and observer of what is happening around them. The participant part is easy to understand. You are there… you’re in the moment … you’re having the conversations. The observer part is where it gets a bit weird. It’s almost as if you are outside of yourself looking at the expanse of the whole as you participate in the whole. You notice things from a big picture perspective. You’re seeing the sociology of it all and how that is driven by theology. You cue in on the differences between the wedding you’re at now and the weddings you were at one and two generations ago. You hear the songs that are being played for the dances and you note what they are communicating. You see the tatted ladies and you say to yourself …. “I never saw that in a wedding from two generations ago.” Then you ask yourself, “What means this?” Same goes for the change in the fashions and styles. You consider the obvious Lesbian Butches present as well those guys who are “light in the loafers.” You think about all the vast change in the culture you have lived in over the last three generations and wonder “how did this happen?” Then you start connecting dots between the culture you are seeing and the reality that culture is merely theology externalized as poured over a  particular people. Participant and observer is all happening at the same time and it is as if one has a foot in two worlds simultaneously. You are there yet you are not there. It’s as if one is both looking through the microscope while at the same time being under the microscope.

I’m pretty sure I don’t like this but I’m also pretty sure it’s not going away. I don’t like it because this way of being forbids one from really being fully part of what is going on around you.

 

Ghost Citations & Footnotes Keep Popping Up … Glaser & Friend Discuss

On 28 May I wrote this mocking Rev. Ben Glaser for completely creating both a citation and a footnote in his ARP moderator’s report on Kinism;

“Rev. Benjamin Glaser, in a recent article, reported that his wife agreed to his marriage to three other women while conceding that she would be glad to be a mother to all his children from various wives. 1

(1) Benjamin Glaser, “Happiness in a Household of Many Wives,” Westminster Theological Journal, accessed March 17, 2026, https://WestminsterTheologicalJournal.com/…/happiness…/.”
—

A friend put a laugh emoji on this and was messaged by the right honorable Benjamin Glaser asking why this was post was so funny.

The following exchange occurred between Glaser and my friend;

Glaser — Why is McAtee’s post so funny?

Friend — It’s a hallucinated citation just like what you posted in your ARP report. Do you have no sense of irony?

Glaser — “You think its funny to mock my wife? Do you have no shame? Disagree with me all you want, don’t bring my family or wife into this.

Friend – “Em, it’s not mocking your wife. It’s mocking you”

Glaser – “Tell my wife that who is balling (sic) her eyes out right now, and my youngest son who doesn’t understand the humor. You own that.”

Friend – “Yeah. McAtee’s story has all the credibility of your ARP study report on Kinism with its hallucinated citations.”

Glaser – “”I know what kind of man you are, and you have to live with that.”

Friend – “That’s a line from the Walking Dead, you hack. LOL”