“Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another’s speech.” (Genesis 11:7)

Here the question that needs to be asked is who are the pronouns “their” and “they” referring to. The obvious answer is the inhabitants of Babel. However, we need to go on and ask, “Who are the inhabitants of Babel,” and with the answer to that question we are right back at Genesis 10 and the table of nations. So, the confusion of “their language” is the confusion of the language of the nations who had disobediently sought to create a unipolar world in defiance of God.

Now, if we grant that it is a small step to think that the confusion of the languages was in keeping with the existence of the nations so that each nation, as descended from Noah, was confused with a language in keeping with its national identity. The reason I point this out is that there exists a kind of school of thought that denies the familial-national dynamic in this passage insisting instead that the division here was not familial-national but only linguistic. The argument seemingly goes that the division at Babel was of such a nature that men from the different family-nations of Genesis 10 were all jumbled up together in the linguistic dispersion. We are therefore expected to believe that all those people who God divided by language were each and all nationally mixed in the linguistic division that God visited them with.

I am suggesting that the weight of the context of the passage is overwhelmingly against that kind of reading. Genesis 11 is not merely a linguistic division but it is a linguistic division in keeping with the already pre-existing familial-national distinctions. God wanted distinct people group Nations and the language confusion was pursuant to that end.

Babel was a nation spreading event and the way God spread the nations was to give them each a tongue so they could not create the unipolar world that defied God and so they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him (Acts 17:27). All of this is more than suggestive that God’s plan for the World is a Biblical Nationalism wherein there is a God-ordained unity and diversity honored. The diversity is found in the reality of nations and the unity is envisioned in each diverse and distinct nation submitting to God as their Creator, Christ as their Redeemer, and the Holy Spirit as their Sanctifier.
Obviously, the sequence of events is that Noah and his family come off the ark, God makes a covenant with Noah and ordains that humans will live under govt, complementing patriarchal rule, Noah’s descendants are then ordered to disperse and inhabit their own territory per ethnic/family divisions, but then they congregate at Babel to establish a conglomerated empire and God has to confuse the languages in order to compel the separation in nations. However, the separation into nations was ordained first, and then the confusion of language was a chastisement due to disobedience. The division by languages may be removed, ultimately, in the New Heavens and New Earth, but the division by nations will remain. (Rev 21:24, 22:2). Alienists will spit blood and foam at the mouth if you try to point this out.

The contemporary church conflates the division by ethno-families, which was part of God’s intention for how mankind should live with the division by language, which was a chastisement for disobedience. The mind of the modern evangelical has been so warped and twisted that it simply will not admit any biblical teaching on the ethnic division. The modern Reformed mind refuses to own that God’s intent for social order is Biblical Nationalism. It’s a type of spiritual blindness imposed by God upon those who desire an egalitarian Internationalist Marxist order.

While reading Matthew Henry I came across something from Henry that really flies in the face of much of what we see in our mad pursuit of multiculturalism, or in suppositions supporting the idea that nations are social constructs that can be held together merely on the basis of propositions. On Genesis 11 (Babel) Matthew Henry can write;

1. Their language was confounded. God, who, when he made man, taught him to speak, and put words into his mouth fit to express the conceptions of his mind, by now caused these builders to forget their former language, and to speak and understand a new one, which yet was common to those of the same tribe or family, but not to others: those of one colony could converse together, but not with those of another.

Understand the implications of Henry’s statement. When God dispersed the tongues the variation and number of tongues were equal to the variation and numbers of preexisting tribes. The fact that God dispersed them by language implies that he dispersed them by tribal identity. If Henry is correct here (and I think he is) this drives a stake through the often-repeated meme of the Christian cultural Marxist fellow travelers that Babel was about languages and not ethnicities. Henry would have us realize that there is a nexus between the confounding of the language and the tribes to whom the languages belonged. When the languages were dispersed, Henry believed, the dispersal was tribe by tribe according to language. Precisely because it was about languages it was about ethnicities. Henry again offers,(4.)

” The project of some to frame a universal character, in order to a universal language, how desirable soever it may seem, is yet, I think, but a vain thing to attempt; for it is to strive against a divine sentence, by which the languages of the nations will be divided while the world stands.”

If according to Henry’s previous reasoning that the confounded tongues corresponded to the confounded tribes then Henry is telling us that ethnic homogeneity for tribes or nations is the divine standard while the world stands. By Henry’s previous reasoning the attempt to build a universal people at Babel was confounded by dividing the tribes by dividing their languages. Current Christian Cultural Marxist fellow travelers, according to Herny, strive against the divine sentence when they insist on pursuing a Christianity that ignores God’s dividing of the peoples. Now, to underscore Henry’s comments we examine how the enemies of Christianity have consistently striven against the divine sentence of dividing people’s and languages of which Henry speaks.

Humanist Manifesto II ELEVENTH:

The principle of moral equality must be furthered through elimination of all discrimination based upon race, religion, sex, age, or national origin. This means equality of opportunity and recognition of talent and merit. Individuals should be encouraged to contribute to their own betterment. If unable, then society should provide means to satisfy their basic economic, health, and cultural needs, including, wherever resources make possible a minimum guaranteed annual income. We are concerned for the welfare of the aged, the infirm, the disadvantaged, and also for the outcasts – the mentally retarded, abandoned, or abused children, the handicapped, prisoners, and addicts – for all who are neglected or ignored by society. Practicing humanists should make it their vocation to humanize personal relations. We deplore racial, religious, ethnic, or class antagonisms. Although we believe in cultural diversity and encourage racial and ethnic pride, we reject separations which promote alienation and set people and groups against each other; we envision an integrated community where people have a maximum opportunity for free and voluntary association.

TWELFTH: We deplore the division of humankind on nationalistic grounds. We have reached a turning point in human history where the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and to move toward the building of a world community in which all sectors of the human family can participate. Thus we look to the development of a system of world law and a world order based upon transnational federal government. This would appreciate cultural pluralism and diversity. It would not exclude pride in national origins and accomplishments nor the handling of regional problems on a regional basis. Human progress, however, can no longer be achieved by focusing on one section of the world, Western or Eastern, developed or underdeveloped. For the first time in human history, no part of humankind can be isolated from any other. Each person’s future is in some way linked to all. We thus reaffirm a commitment to the building of world community, at the same time recognizing that this commits us to some hard choices.

The 1936 Constitution of the Soviet Union ARTICLE 123.

Equality of rights of citizens of the U.S.S.R., irrespective of their nationality or race, in all spheres of economic, state, cultural, social and political life, is an indefeasible law. Any direct or indirect restriction of the rights of, or, conversely, any establishment of direct or indirect privileges for, citizens on account of their race or nationality, as well as any advocacy of racial or national exclusiveness or hatred and contempt, is punishable by law.

When we compare and contrast a Father of Historic Christianity (Matthew Henry) with the 20th century Humanists and Communists we see a marked contrast between the oikophilia (love of one’s household and one’s faith) of Christianity and the Babelphilia (love of Babel and so hatred of ethnic distinctions) of the Marxists. Now, naturally, this one point of harmony of Christians and Marxist does not by itself prove that Christians who embrace a globalism that automatically attacks ethnic homogeneity in a knee jerk fashion are Marxists but it at least should cause us to ask questions of whether or not such “Christians” are fellow travelers.

Last week we began to look at the Tower of Babel and the agenda behind the building of the Tower of Babel. We noted the desire for man to frustrate God’s intent for man to be fruitful, to multiply and fill the earth. Instead, fallen man decided to coalesce there on the plains of Shinar to build a City of Man with the intent of making a name for themselves.

We noted how this political agenda of making a name for themselves was not absent a religion that supported this project. That religion we saw was embodied in the Tower of Babel which was a Temple Ziggurat. It is not hard to envision that this Temple Ziggurat was at the center of the city they were building thus communicating, by way of the layout of Babel, that pagan religion was at the center of their being.

We noted that this perhaps was the first form of what would be many attempts over the centuries at Globalist Internationalism… that is the desire of man to live in a New World Order in defiance of God’s Order. As we said fallen man will always revert back to the stereotypical sin of fallen man and that is the desire to be God.

In the Scriptures we see this attempt of man to collective man to engod himself in the book of Daniel.

“The reference to the ‘Land of Shinar’ (Daniel 1:2) recalls Gen. 11:2 and the tower of Babel. Hence, Nebuchadnezzar is viewed as ‘the humanistic reviver’ of what happened at Babel.”

Thomas Schreiner
The King in His Beauty — pg. 388

If this is true then Nebuchadnezzar is the 2nd coming of Nimrod. Just as Nimrod sought to build Babel to express the glory of Man so Nebuchadnezzar builds a 90 foot gold image of himself to symbolize his own world-wide dominion. Just as God brought Nimrod’s project low in Gen. 11 so God brings Nebuchadnezzar himself low by touching him with insanity.

We should not deceive ourselves into thinking that this propensity is just an ancient phenomenon. As we noted last week this push to collectivize man such as we see here @ Babel and later in Nebuchadnezzar’s ambitions we have seen repeatedly in the age of the Enlightenment.

Vienna Conference
League of Nations
United Nations

We are living in again today as we read in Klaus Schwab’s 2020 book – “Covid-19; The Great Reset. Before I read this keep in mind that Schwab should be thought of as the Nimrod of our age. He is among the 1% and runs a thing called the World Economic Forum. Try to imagine a get together of all the important people of Babel around a table. That is what the WEF is. These are the types who go to Davos who are members of the Bilderbergers, CFR, and the Trilateral commission. These are the types who want to go all Babel again and remake a New World Order.

How do I know this?

Well, one hint is the Babel UN building in Strasbourg France. There you will find the European Union Parliament building in Strasbourg and the architecture is meant to represent an unfinished building, This building which to the eye looks unfinished is based on the painting of 16^th century renaissance painter Peter Bruegel showing the Tower of Babel as the unfinished building it would have been after the denizens of Babel had been dispersed by God’s judgments. The Strasbourg UN Parliament Building looks like it is unfinished and has an uncanny resemblance to Bruegel’s masterpiece. This was not accidental.

Another hint is books being written in 2020 by the intellectual descendants of Nimrod, and the important men of Babel, and Nebuchadnezzar. Klaus Schwab as the 2^nd Nimrod recently wrote,

1.3.3. The return of “big” government

In the words of John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge: “The COVID-19 pandemic has made government important again. Not just powerful again (look at those once-mighty companies begging for help), but also vital again: It matters enormously whether your country has a good health service, competent bureaucrats and sound finances. Good government is the difference between living and dying.”

Here it is for all those who have eyes to see… in the State we live and move and have our being. The builders of Babel could not have said it more plainly … Good government is the difference between living and dying. Not God is the difference between living and dying… not the Lord Christ is the difference between living and dying…. but good government is the difference between living and dying.


Fallen man will seek to arise to the “Most High” and does this either on an individual basis such as Eve did with the fruit or fallen man will do this on a collective basis as we see here with Babel. Babel is just a pronouncement by man, in his collective expression, that he will ascend to the most high.

In both cases fallen man, in taking up God’s prerogatives will seek to dictate the meaning of meaning and so will seek to create his own reality and to provide his own salvation.

We are living in the time of the reorganization of Babel. I will provide more evidence for that but before doing that allow me to quote the Roman Catholic G. K. Chesterton where we find a blind pig finding an acorn.

“Beware of men and of movements that speak the language of Babel. Regardless of whether they are Communists or Fascists, Universalists or Deists, Socialists or Capitalists, Alchemists or Templars, Liberals or Conservatives: beware of their New World Order; beware of their “Peace in our Time”; beware of their New Age; beware of their Fraternal Harmony; beware of their Novus Ordo Saeculorum. It is merely part and parcel of that same Tower of Babel impulse which God cursed so long ago. it is merely a new sprig from the primordial root of humanism: man seizing his own destiny and making a name for himself in the annals of history.”

G. K. Chesterton

And why should all this find its way into a sermon? Well, if you’ve been in Sunday School you know the answer to that. The Calvinist draws a straight line from spiritual freedom to civil freedom. The Calvinist, because he is a spiritual free man, is the most distasteful creature imaginable to tyrants ruling apart from God’s Law.

Here we have been set free by Jesus Christ from the bondage of sin, misery and guilt. This means we are free to do what we could never do before and that is to walk in ever increasing obedience to our great King’s Law-Word. Walking in ever increasing obedience applies not only to our private lives but also to our public lives. In our public lives we will not be brought back into bondage by those Tyrants who would posit salvation as being found in the State. The State’s role is to magnify and glorify God and scripture very clearly limits the size and role of the State. The State’s role is not to seek to be an Babel institution.

We are going to soon be reading our preparatory reading. When we come to the table next week we are reminded that we are the occupants of another Kingdom with another King and another Law order. This Kingdom that we belong to is a Kingdom that is to cover the cosmos before the return of the King. All of this reminds us that we do not live as “everything inside the state, nothing outside of the state.” We are to live in keeping with the commandments of the great King and that means the active opposition to the Nimrods, Pharaohs, Ahabs and Jezebels, Nebuchadnezzars, Herods, Neros, Charles I, Robespierres, Lenins, Stalins, Mao’s and Bidens.

The Church is a great anvil that many a hammer over the centuries has been worn out upon. If the Church will but be an anvil again I’m quite willing for the hammer to fall.

What is happening before our eyes … this pursuit of what is being called “The Great Reset” is nothing but the attempt to rebuild the Tower of Babel. It is nothing but Fallen man’s renewed attempt to “make a name for himself,” by casting off God’s salvation in favor of a salvation that will be provided by the State. It impinges upon Christianity precisely because it is the Kingdom of Darkness seeking to cover the Kingdom of God’s dear son.

The signs of it being at the door are everywhere for those with eyes to see. It is not only a matter of some billionaire writing a book. Listen to the Prime Minister of Canada recently crow about it.

“Canada believes that a strong coordinated response across the world and across sectors is essential. This pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset. This is our chance to accelerate our pre-pandemic efforts to reimagine economic systems that actually address global challenges like extreme poverty, inequality, and climate change.”

PM Justin Trudeau

You may not realize it but election 2020 – an election the outcome of which is yet to be determined – is about this New World Order called now “The Great Reset.”

“The Great Reset” w/ its moronic theme of “Build back better,” is our new Babel. The Great Reset is the attempt by the global 1% comprised of putatively Jewish Bankers and their Shabazz Goy to institute a global New World Order. It is supported by everyone from that great beast Pope Francis, in Encyclical, entitled “Fratelli tutti” (“Brothers, all”). There Francis calls for greater multilateral cooperation among countries, and urges a reform of the United Nations – so the “concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth.”

In this Great Reset the goal is merely the incarnation of the goals of humanism for centuries. Included in the Great Reset is the idea of a Guaranteed Universal Income which was thumped for in the Humanist manifesto II written in 1973.

Humanist Manifesto II

ELEVENTH: The principle of moral equality must be furthered through elimination of all discrimination based upon race, religion, sex, age, or national origin. This means equality of opportunity and recognition of talent and merit. Individuals should be encouraged to contribute to their own betterment. If unable, then society should provide means to satisfy their basic economic, health, and cultural needs, including, wherever resources make possible, a minimum guaranteed annual income.

TWELFTH: We deplore the division of humankind on nationalistic grounds. We have reached a turning point in human history where the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and to move toward the building of a world community in which all sectors of the human family can participate. Thus we look to the development of a system of world law and a world order based upon transnational federal government.

Really, there is absolutely nothing new in this “Great Reset.” You can find its tired retreaded themes in every push to overthrow God’s Kingdom since Babel. You can find it in every ridiculous novel on Utopia written from time immemorial.

Plato’s “Republic”
Thomas Moore’s “Utopia”
Colonel House’s “Philip Dru; Adminstrator”
Edward Bellamy’s “Looking Backward”
H. G. Wells – “The Modern Utopia”

It’s all there. The same themes. The same idea. The same push to Imagine there are no nations and above us only sky. It’s all there… fallen man’s attempt to throw God off His throne and to provide his own salvation. It’s all there… the idea that all for the state… nothing outside of the State. Call it the Great Reset … call it Marxism, Socialism, Fascism, Fabianism, Syndicalism, it all amounts to much the same as crystallized by Fabian Socialist and Irish Playwright George Bernard Shaw,

“I also made it quite clear that Socialism means equality of income or nothing, and that under socialism you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you like it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live you would have to live well.”

~ George Bernard Shaw

If we love our God and His Christ… if we love our children … if we love our freedom then we have to start embracing the mindset of the dissident and the resistance fighter…. The Christian.

Another quote to show what we are up against,

Covid-19, The Great Reset, Schwab – Malleret, pp. 57-58

“It is of course much too early to depict with any degree of accuracy the
form that the societal reset will take in different countries, but some of its
broad global contours can already be delineated. First and foremost, the
post-pandemic era will usher in a period of massive wealth redistribution,
from the rich to the poor and from capital to labour.”

___

Now keep in mind that we are talking about a violation of the 8th commandment. We are talking about the Government stealing from the non 1% rich and impoverishing everyone else. You can bet the 1% won’t be losing any of their wealth. The result of this will be the elimination of any such thing as a “middle class” so that the outcome will be a have vs. have not world order. The 1% will be the farmers and the rest of us will be the cattle.

Read your history. See how this redistribution model worked in Bolshevik Russia. Read how it worked in Castro’s Cuba. Read how it worked in Mao’s China. Shoot … read how it worked among our Pilgrim fathers when they tried using it as an economic model.

Continuing with Schwab,

“Second, COVID-19 is likely to sound the death knell of neoliberalism, a corpus of ideas and policies that can loosely be defined as favouring competition over solidarity, creative destruction over government intervention and economic growth over social welfare. For a number of years, the neoliberal doctrine has been on the wane, with many commentators, business leaders and policy-makers increasingly denouncing its “market fetishism”, but COVID-19 brought the coup de grâce.

Understand when Schwab writes the death knew of ‘neo-liberalism” what the man is saying is the death knell of the very little of Capitalism that remains in our Economic structures.

“It is no coincidence that the two countries that over the past few years embraced the policies of neoliberalism with most fervour – the US and the UK – are among those that suffered the most casualties during the pandemic. These two concomitant forces – massive redistribution on the one hand and abandoning neoliberal policies on the other – will exert a defining impact on our societies’ organization, ranging from how inequalities could spur social unrest to the increasing role of governments and the redefinition of social contracts.”

People forget what the Great Reset has brought in its previous incarnations. They forget Robespierre’s “Committee on Public Safety,” and its love affair with Madame la Guillotine. They forget Stalin’s Gulags. They forget Mao’s “Great Leap Forward.” They forget Pol Pot’s emptying of Phnom Penhand the mass slaughter there.

I remember. In my books I’ve been there. I see the bloody finger of Klaus Schwab and the rest of these anti-Christ vermin behind all these perfumed proposals for their “Great Reset” New World Order. Ask the authorities of India about Bill Gates work on the Great Reset in India with his “vaccines.” The death count has been staggering. Ask about their plans to implement Trans-humanism. Ask about their plans to eliminate the White Christian people as a people.

Conclusion

The State would be the the Institution upon which the Gods ascend and descend. But as Christians we reject the God-State and continue to insist that it is only in Jesus Christ Crucified, Risen, Ascended and Ruling, that God is to be found. As Christians we will not live by the Law-Word of another King. We will not bow to the pagan Great Reset State just as our Christian forefathers have never bowed to pagan States. We will not be animated by their fear-mongering intended to stampede us into compliance. We will not listen when they propagandize and lie and so speak the language of their father the Devil. We will not inflict ourselves or our children with their vaccine black magic potions laced as they are with fetal cells. We will not obey their illegitimate orders. We will remain faithful and obedient to our Great High King wherein we find life and life abundantly.

Our orders are to fight
Then if we win
or bravely fail
What matters it?
God only doth prevail

The Servants Craveth naught
Except to serve with might
We were not told
To win or lose
Our orders are to fight.

Here I continue dissecting Dr. R. Scott’s Clark’s R2K rant against Theocracy.

Clark writes,

“It is no business of the state where I worship or how and the state has no business imposing a religion upon me or in coercing—all taxation is coercion—me into funding another religious sect (I do not use the term sect here prejudicially but neutrally since, as far as the civil magistrate is concerned, all religions are sects).”

Bret responds,

This sounds so noble. It is pure Americana. But let’s look at this closely before we salute this sentiment.

Is it really no business of the state where I worship? What if I worship in a mosque where they tell me that honor killing errant women is pleasing to Allah? Is it of no interest to the state if where I worship teaches that Allah is pleased with marrying 8-year-old little girls to grown adult men? Does the state have no interest when a synagogue is teaching from the Talmud Jesus is in hell boiling in excrement? Does the state have no interest when in worship the congregation is smoking peyote? (see Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith) Does the state have no interest when in worship marriage services are conducted marrying several women to one man? How about worship where child sacrifice is occurring? Does the State have no interest then?

You see, it is just not true that the State has no business where its citizens worship and it is not true that the State has no business in how they worship.

And does Scott really want to suggest that the monies he is taxed now do not go towards religious sects he disagrees with? What about all that money that is going to support the State humanist Churches called “Government schools?”

Next Scott tries to argue that the US Constitution is not a uniquely Christian document and while there is no doubt that the Constitution is lacking in a bold explicit affirmation of Christianity, Scott should not miss this clause,

“If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a law, in like Manner as if he had signed it . . . “

Article I, Section 7Constitution of the United States of America

Sundays excepted is in the Constitution as a nod to Sabbath laws, which in America existed because of its status as a Christian nation. Scott should be careful with his sweeping generalistic statements.

Scott then goes on to insist that the American experiment of a neutral public square and religious pluralism has worked well. Since Scott seldom looks beneath the surface he can’t see how badly this mythic pluralism has been. He can’t see how putative religious pluralism accounted for the bloody civil war where the Unitarian “Christianity” of the North murdered, raped, and maimed its way across the Christian South. Apparently, Scott can’t see how this putative religious pluralism is now ripping the country apart. I can’t force the man to see what his glasses will not allow him to see.

Scott next makes an incredible boner of a statement when he asks,

Is not one purpose of the Bill of Rights to protect our liberty from theocrats and despots?

Actually, “no” Scott that was never to be one of the purposes of the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was drafted in its original intent to protect the Liberty of the States (not individuals) from those in the Federal Government who would seek to fix a uniform Christian Denomination on all the colonies. Most of the States in their State documents were explicitly Theocratic of one stripe or another and the Bill of Rights had the intent of making it clear that the Feds were not to mess with that. The Bill of Rights on this point was drafted with the express intent of protecting the State theocracies from any Federal interference. The States liked their theocracies that Scott so consistently laments.

So, given how wrong Scott is here how can his interpretation of American History be trusted at any other point?

Scott then makes, quite without knowing it I’m sure, the case for Secession when he acknowledges the impossibility of having a state Church in our modern context in America given the presence of so many false churches.

Next Scott with hostile intent violates the 9th commandment by slandering Reconstructionists with the Federal Vision brush. The man has been told constantly that Federal Vision does not equal Reconstructionism and yet he continues with the slander. This is another major reason I really really despise the man’s theology and the fact that people actually listen to this mouth of Sauron.

I may have one more go at Clark. His R2K analysis is so head up his … armpit on postmillennialism it is difficult to keep a civil tongue in my typing fingers. If I have another go at his article it will deal with Scott’s Harley Quinn understanding of Postmillennialism.

 “The church is being brought ethical concerns and is responding with epistemological critique. Like a man who tells you he is bleeding, and you ask, ‘How did you come to that conclusion?’”

Rasool Berry
Teaching pastor at The Bridge Church in Brooklyn

I snatched this from a John Piper article explaining why it is wrong to label people who are Critical Race Theorists are Critical Race Theorists. This is an example that Piper used as to why we should not do that. Pastor Rasool, you see, is merely complaining about racism and has no other agenda, and when we rightly label his complaint as an example of CRT then we are guilty of slander. Never mind if the analysis of his complaint is accurate.

The Church indeed is being brought ethical concerns but they are ethical concerns birthed by a mother besides Christianity. The same people who are bringing all these ethical concerns are the same people complaining about “white fragility,” “systemic racism,” and “institutional racism.” The bleeding victim these people find is always non-caucasian and the perp of the crime is always some Christian White chap.

Epistemological critique is exactly what is needed because the complaint of “fallen man bleeding” seems to be always coming from the usual CRT suspects. I heard it ten years ago when I was at a Church conclave and one of the other representatives complained about Climate Change. When I tried to pin the chap with the complaint down he answered in a hostile manner that he knew people in Bangledesh whose crops were suffering and that it was because of the White Christian in the West who wouldn’t take Climate Change seriously. Here was a scenario where a representative of the bleeding man was faulting me for asking me how he came to the conclusion that the Bangladeshi farmer was bleeding. If the Bangladeshi farmer is bleeding it has nothing to do with something that doesn’t exist (anthropogenic climate change). He just wanted me to feel guilty and so support some form of reparations.

The bleeding man, exceptions notwithstanding, right now is the Christian White man and no tourniquet can be applied to staunch the bleeding because the guy doing the stabbing is the one complaining about how he is bleeding and how unfair it is that anyone would dare ask him how he knows he is bleeding. It is a classic example of accusing others of what you are yourself are guilty of.