Your’s is fiction. Mine is history.

Useful notes/insights from sages for understanding religious commonalities and claimed differences:

John Dominic Crossan was right to state that it is “unethical” to call someone else’s myth “fiction”, and then claim that yours is “history”, if both of you are referring to the same fundamental myth. This would include Christians claiming the virgin birth myths of Ceasars/emperors were false, when Christianity had itself borrowed such claims to frame its Christ myth- i.e. the mythology of gods impregnating women to birth great men. So also resurrection themes descended from the Egyptian mythology of Isis and Osiris.

The charge of “unethical” applies also to similar claims made regarding varied other shared core themes/myths of the world religions. The other guy’s beliefs are “fiction”, while mine are “history”. Look at the core theme behind all the diverse expressions from tradition to tradition.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miraculous_births

https://www.thenewsminute.com/features/shared-myths-jesus-time-miraculous-birth-stories-common-kings-and-emperors-54776

Soon coming– Bob Brinsmead’s latest writeup on how Hellenism, from the time of Alexander the Great, began to shape the consciousness and narratives of the world, mainly the West. Brinsmead does a brilliant job showing how Plato’s approach to reality shaped the Christian approach to the Bible- i.e. that Plato’s invisible Forms were the Real and the patterns/shadows of this world just pointed to that greater Reality that was invisible to us.

That became the way in which Christians viewed and read the Bible and Paul’s Christ myth. Everything that happened before, i.e. in the Old Testament, were just patterns that pointed to the Real Form of the invisible Christ and his sacrifice to pay for sin. The outcome of embracing Plato’s approach? Nothing in this world really matters except, with Paul, to be focused on attaining salvation with the Christ in the next invisible world.

Bob shows how Historical Jesus countered this fallacy with his new message that focused on the kingdom of God in this life and world, on loving others here and now in practical and ordinary ways (i.e. food, clothing, healing). Jesus taught a way of living that ignored some future otherworldly existence to, instead, contribute to making this life and world a better place for others.

Point? How Greek Hellenism, along with Zoroastrian apocalyptic millennialism, powerfully shaped the West and Western religious narratives/traditions. Arthur Herman also offers some good input on the prominent influence of the Greeks on Western civilization (“The Cave and the Light: Plato versus Aristotle and the Struggle for the Soul of Western Civilization”), along with Helmut Koester’s good work in “History, Culture, and Religion of the Hellenistic Age”.

Good one, Bob. You keep hitting home runs. Hence, my conclusion that you are among the finest of theological minds on the planet. Add here your good work on climate alarmism, and the amazing benefits of CO2, among the many other topics we discuss.

I will post the link to Bob’s new material as soon as he puts it on his site at “bobbrinsmead.com.” Bob Brinsmead has also been “the wise man” that Joe Campbell noted in regard to the “Hero’s Quest”, the wise sage who gives struggling heroes a weapon to slay their monsters, as in a mentor who offers good advice to help others resolve the issues they struggle with. I will post my personal story along this line soon. How Bob helped me to conquer my personal monster- the religious God.

Read also Bob’s material on sacrifice– “The Historical Jesus: What the Scholars are Saying” at…

https://bobbrinsmead.com/the-historical-jesus-what-the-scholars-are-saying/

Bob makes clear the profound contradiction between historical Jesus and Paul’s Christ myth. Jesus took up the protest of the Old Testament prophets against the sacrifice industry. The prophets had stated that God detested sacrifices- Hosea 6:6, Isaiah 1:11-31, Jeremiah 7:21-23, etc.

Jesus took that protest further by presenting an entirely new theology of God as unconditional love. Meaning, there was no divine demand for the condition of sacrifice as the necessary prerequisite for forgiveness, acceptance, or salvation. There had never been any such deity or demand for the condition of sacrifice.

As Bob argues from the research of varied New Testament scholars/historians, Jesus was eventually put to death for protesting the sacrifices at the Jerusalem temple. The priests recognized the threat that he presented to their livelihood.

Then Paul, two decades after Jesus died, rejected that anti-sacrifice message and protest, and retreated to mythical primitivism to transform Jesus into the ultimate sacrifice of his Christ mythology. The New Testament authors, affirming Paul’s Christ myth, notably Matthew, claim that Jesus, as prophesied divine sacrifice, was predicted throughout the Old Testament. They are following Plato’s approach of seeing patterns that point to the Real Forms.

Further, as Bob shows, the early Hebrews rejected sacrifices as a “heresy” that was imposed on Judaism by the priesthood. Paul and his supporting cast of New Testament authors all sided with the corrupt priesthood and their sacrifice industry that the unconditional God of Jesus detested.

There is no greater oxymoronic contradiction anywhere in history comparable to what Christianity promotes in the “Jesus Christ” merger, where two entirely opposite persons/messages are combined into one. The result is profound cognitive dissonance (holding two contradictory things at the same time) unlike any in history.

The term “Jesus Christ” is contradiction and resultant cognitive dissonance taken to ultimate reach.

Here is a reposting of some material from a week or so ago. It has stirred some response from Islamic countries so I want to give it more exposure for interested folks from those areas.

Intro note: Western civilization has three great religious traditions- i.e. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. All three have been influenced and shaped by the Persian/Zoroastrian religion of some 3,500 years ago, Wendell Krossa

Sample source- https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2007/4/11/321915/-

First, right out of the gate- The Zoroastrian beliefs in cosmic dualism and apocalyptic are the two worst of the “bad religious ideas” that it bequeathed to the West and Western religions. These have been among the most destructive ideas ever conceived. Cosmic dualism (God fighting Satan) has validated endless human tribal dualisms, and wars of tribe against tribe. Apocalyptic (as part of a complex of bad ideas) has incited too many mass-destruction and mass-death outcomes across history.

(Insert note: There are legitimate battles of good against evil- e.g. the Nazi/Allies war. But in all battles, we maintain our humanity and avoid any tribalism deformity by remembering that our “enemies”, even though we must defeat them in war, are still our family and deserve humane treatment post-war.)

My brain raises a bit of a flag of caution about engaging this topic below of bad ideas in religious traditions. It’s a bit unsettling to tackle because so many approach such subjects with the pre-intent to misunderstand, to pull comments out of context and twist meanings, and then to revert to smears and vilification- i.e. “Islamophobia”, etc. But the issues at play are about broader concerns than any “religiophobia” smears can dismiss.

I will wade in because the outcomes have been consistently and incalculably destructive and the root contributing factors still dominate human narratives and minds with dangerously inciting and validating ideals. The warning of Richard Landes, and the military guy, were never more critical that if you don’t deal with these inciting/validating ideas behind destructive movements, then you will only repeat them.

“It’s the commonalities, stupid” (paraphrasing James Carville’s “It’s the economy, stupid”). Wendell Krossa

All of us are facing a common enemy or monster in these monstrous ideas that affirm and validate tribalism, domination of others, and punitive destruction of differing others. I am speaking to the inner battle, the real battle of life, where we face the common monster of all humanity. Our real struggle in life is not against differing others but against our own inherited impulses to tribalism, domination, and punitive, destructive response to the failures of others. Our real battle is with the beliefs/ideas/themes in our narratives, especially in our religious narratives, that validate our worst impulses.

Be aware that the monster hides by covering itself with religious robes, and especially likes to hide behind deity.

Psychologist Harold Ellens exposed this element of reframing the worst of features in terms of the best of divinity (i.e. the hiding trick) and what such monstrous features do to human minds…

“There is in Western culture a psychological archetype, a metaphor that has to do with the image of a violent and wrathful God… this image represents God sufficiently disturbed by the sinfulness of humanity that God had only two options: destroy us or substitute a sacrifice to pay for our sins. He did the latter. He killed Christ.

“… the crucifixion, a hugely violent act of infanticide or child sacrifice, has been disguised by Christian conservative theologians as a ‘remarkable act of grace’. Such a metaphor of an angry God, who cannot forgive unless appeased by a bloody sacrifice, has been ‘right at the center of the Master Story of the Western world for the last 2,000 years. And the unavoidable consequence for the human mind is a strong tendency to use violence’.” (See the full context of Ellen’s comments in Zenon Lotufo’s “Cruel God, Kind God”)

Continuing…

This inner battle relates also the “commonalities” thing that I am pointing to and commenting on further below.

My point and intent below is to emphasize commonalities in terms of our meta-narratives- i.e. that we all make the same mistakes in our narratives, holding the same bad ideas that incite and validate bad impulses. Hence, we all face the same enemies, monsters, the ones inside us. The actual struggle of life (i.e. the real “righteous battle against evil”) is not about us warring against one another over our differences. Those battles sidetrack us from the war that matters most (i.e. Solzhenitsyn’s point that the real battle of good versus evil runs down the center of every human heart). Further, our battles with others tend to blur and bury the fact of fundamental human oneness, the oneness of the human family.

A key point below that qualifies the commonalities in all three Western religions- Islam borrowed from Jewish Christianity, including the most appalling features of threat theology, but did not include the “diamond” teachings of Historical Jesus. Under Christian Ebionite Waraqa’s guidance, Muhammad borrowed the more threatening features of primitive theology, features similar to those of Paul’s Christ myth (i.e. the “wrathful” God of Romans, destroying deity of Revelation 19, etc.). But without the moderating influence of Historical Jesus, the outcomes have not been good for religions like Islam. That is one notable difference between Christianity and Islam, among the many shared common themes of both religions.

Significant commonalities in all the great world religions don’t give anyone the escape clause to argue- “My religion is better than yours”. As for the Jesus material in Christianity, that message presents a potent moderating influence on the religion. But Christianity overall, in emphasizing Paul’s Christ myth, has seriously distorted the Jesus material, “buried it” according to Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy. That is as egregious an offense as anything in any other religion, and that discredits the back-patting that Christians might want to engage when comparing their tradition to other religions.

Important intro note: This site repeatedly employs the “evil triad” of “tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction” as a summarization of the most destructive impulses in people, the worst of our inherited animal impulses. Point? These impulses- the worst of the worst- have been incited and validated across history by bad ideas/ideals in human narratives, notably bad religious ideas.

The incitement and validation rises to its most harmful influence when such features are projected onto deity (i.e. God as favoring true believers, damning unbelievers, God as Lord/King validating relationships of domination/submission, God as retaliatory destroyer through apocalypse/hell). These psychopathologies, projected onto deity, have long held dominant place in defining humanity’s highest ideal and authority. Who’s to blame in that? Religious traditions.

Bad ideas inciting and validating bad human behavior operates through the “behavior based on belief” model that people have used across history. This pattern developed from the primal human impulse for meaning and purpose as related to deity. People, motivated by their impulse to live according to the purpose for which they were created, have long appealed to the divine Model for a pat on the back.

This is what Historical Jesus was referring to when he concluded his summary statement of his message (Luke 6:27-36) with “Be merciful as your Father is merciful”. Be like your Creator. Validate your behavior with an appeal to your understanding of what God is like.

This all goes haywire, and hell is unleashed on societies, when the image of deity is corrupted with inhuman features like tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction of differing others. As Bob Brinsmead has said, “Men never do greater evil than when they do it in the name of God.” And if your God validates the worst in you… well, look out people.

Most of us still feel the tensing of our guts at the nauseating horror of what young Muslim men did in Israel Oct.7, 2023, raping, burning, murdering as they screamed “Allahu Akbar” (“praise/glory to God”). But then stepping back to view the bigger picture, we remember that is exactly what Christians did in Jerusalem roughly a millennium ago as they dismembered Muslim bodies- men, women, and children- till the blood ran ankle-deep, singing hymns and praising God that they could take part in the slaughter of God’s enemies. And that followed the slaughter of Jewish communities as the Crusaders marched across Europe on the way to Israel. And we look at the Jewish Old Testament for those repetitious accounts of early Hebrews slaughtering men, women, and children. All in the name of God. Well, Mircea Eliade recounts that even early Buddhists killed one another in battles over which sect truly represented their founder.

And atheists/materialists- Wipe that smirk off your faces. Look at the bloody crusades your philosophy/ideology has taken part in. 100 million bodies just last century.

The obvious rejoinder here is to make sure that your God (your conception of deity) is fully and authentically humane. This is critical to solving the problem that the military guy pointed to after the 2014 eruption of ISIS violence in Syria- i.e. that if you want to solve eruptions of violence, then go after the ideas that incite and validate such eruptions.

For atheists/materialists, this also applies to the ultimate ideals/authorities that you hold. What features define those ideals? The cold, predatory drives of our primate ancestors as explained through the often too-dogmatic doctrines of evolutionary biology? Like the young rapper who explained the advocacy for violence in his music- “We are, after all, just animals”.

I am repeatedly flabbergasted at hearing young people state their status as “secular, materialist, atheist, etc.”, and then mouthing the themes of- “the past was better (original paradise of a wilderness world), corrupt humans ruined paradise, life is now declining toward something worse, toward apocalyptic ending (e.g. climate apocalypse), we must make a sacrifice for our sins (“de-growth, de-development, decarbonization”- return to the ”morally superior” simple lifestyles of the “noble savages” of the communalism past who were “more connected” to Mother Earth, etc.), and then we must engage a righteous battle against our enemies who threaten life on earth with their embrace of industrial, Classic Liberal civilization, and if we defeat them, then we are promised restored paradise or some new communalism utopia”. Proudly identifying as “secular materialist” but espousing the very same primitive themes of the earliest mythologies and religions from across history. Sheesh, eh.

Ah Joe Campbell, you nailed it, stating that all people across history have believed the same primitive myths, and across all the cultures of the world.

First, some background on the child rape horror in Britian. This relates to my comments in response to the Piers Morgan interview of Jordan Peterson in a link further below:

“Britain’s mass child rape horror and the price of not being called racist: Thanks to Elon Musk, the ‘grooming gangs’ scandal is finally getting the outrage it deserves”, Michael Murphy. Jan.9, 2025

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/michael-murphy-britains-mass-child-rape-horror-and-the-price-of-not-being-called-racist

The story of mass child rapes in Britain by Pakistani Muslim men has provoked outrage and contentious discussion about what is happening. Note this interview of Jordan Peterson by Piers Morgan, Wendell Krossa

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKCB-MhBP7I&t=904s

Some on the Piers Morgan panel argued that Islam has a worse proclivity than Christianity to such horrific behavior. Kind of a tribalism position- We Christians are not as bad as you Muslims. While it is true that over the past few centuries most Christians have moderated the violent behaviors of their past history, Christianity also has a history of really bad behavior and episodes of bloodshed that are unequaled, some argue, by any other religion. I won’t go into the history of the Councils, Crusades, Inquisitions, persecution of heretics and witches, etc.

Other panel members taking the Muslim side, defensively state that Islam is not an inherently violent religion.

Some on the Morgan panel noted that the rape scandal is due more to cultural influences on those Pakistani men, not so much the influences from their religion. That is worth considering in the effort to understand better what happened.

Other larger background points to consider:

Someone once stated that the Christian bible has some 600-plus passages where God advocates or approves the use of violence against others, including Moses affirming the mass rape of captive women. This link lists over 1000 biblical passages pointing to divine approval or advocacy of violence.

https://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html

The Quran presents the same angry, violent deity as Christianity, with numerous threats from the angry God against unbelievers who will be cast into the fire (Hell) where there is severe eternal torment and from which there is no escape. Such warnings are on almost every page, or other page, of the Quran. That endless repetition gives the sense of an overwhelmingly dominant theme or message being proclaimed, and not just a peripheral “metaphor”.

(Note- A trend in the theology of all major religious traditions is to dismiss the harsher features in their belief systems as just “metaphor”. But, as one Muslim writer noted, that does not alter the “content” of what is being communicated.)

https://www.quora.com/Since-the-Koran-has-roughly-109-verses-that-calls-for-violence-against-unbelievers-how-is-it-that-Muslims-say-that-it-is-a-religion-of-peace

The deities of all three religious traditions share the same primitive features of tribalism (true believers saved, unbelievers damned), domination (submission to the deity and to authorities appointed by the deity), and then the punitive destruction of enemies. This applies also to the third of the great Western religious traditions- Judaism.

All three religions share the same fundamental religious themes that incite and validate bad behavior in members. Defenders of all three traditions must take responsibility for those ideas in their belief systems and for the damage that has been done over past history, damage incited, guided, and validated by those very ideas. This site repeatedly posts the evidence from historians of such damage (i.e. Richard Landes on the Christian ideas that drove Marxism, Nazism, and are now driving environmental alarmism, along with the research of Arthur Herman, Arthur Mendel, David Redles, and others.)

The defensive denial response of true believers in these religions is that- “Our religion is a religion of peace”. And yes, most members of all three traditions have learned to moderate their behavior to become less tribal, less dominating, less violent toward unbelievers. All such moderation is to be sincerely praised.

I would attribute this ‘contemporary era’ moderation more to the influence of the common human spirit in all humanity, the modern increase in human sensitivity to past barbarity, and the emergence, development, and promotion of common human rights in the modern era, etc. This moderation has occurred despite the ongoing influence of bad religious ideas in all three traditions. Stephen Pinker, in his “Better Angels of Our Nature”, comments on how the moderation of religion occurred in the modern era as religious believers experienced revulsion at the past violent history of their traditions.

But the ideas that incite and validate the worst of human impulses are still there in the belief systems, maintaining their potential to again incite and validate some members to bad behavior, as in the past. Those particular ideas in the mix, the ones that hold the most potential to incite bad behavior, need to be cleaned out entirely because of the risk of people seeking inspiration/validation from their religious beliefs, especially validation from the nature of the God at the core of religion, the ultimate ideal and authority of humanity.

Extremist violence associated with all three religions is not due to some aberrational misinterpretation of fringe features of the religious belief systems. It is based on the core beliefs/themes of all three religions. Notably, beliefs/themes that define the deities of the religions.

I would again affirm what the military guy said after the ISIS eruption of violence in Syria in 2014. If you want to prevent future eruptions of such bad behavior, then go after the core ideas in the traditions that incite and validate such violence and other pathology.

What is being advocated here is simply what we have learned to do in all areas of life- i.e. discern between the good and the bad, between the chaff and the wheat, and then toss out the bad stuff. That is what Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy urged when they argued for making a clear distinction between the “diamonds/pearls” of Jesus and the Christ mythology of Paul.

While I applaud all religious reformism, too much of it remains tinkering around the periphery and not getting to the real root of the problem… due to fear of committing “blasphemy, heresy”? Well, then its helpful to recognize the “benefits of blasphemy”.

See for example, “Blasphemy has set us free”, Robert Fulford, National Post, Feb. 18, 2006.

https://robertfulford.com/2006-02-18-blasphemy.html

Also…

https://www.cato.org/policy-report/may/june-2021/terror-tyranny-blasphemy-laws

Back to this Peterson/Morgan conversation over Islam and Christianity…

To hone my point below- Note that the nature/character of the deity is the ultimate ideal and authority of these Western religions. That reality holds the most potential to incite and validate harm if not fully humane (see the statements of Harold Ellens below).

All three Western religions share a common set of ideas/beliefs that have descended down from the Persian Zoroaster and his religion. Zoroaster has been recognized for assembling the previously scattered themes of primitive mythologies into a formal religion.

Hence, all three Western religions share the same basic views on the nature and character of deity, all embracing the same basic themes that have been passed down from Zoroaster to Judaism to Christianity and then to Islam.

https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20170406-this-obscure-religion-shaped-the-west

Some commentators focus on the cosmic dualism myth as the main influence on the West. The Zoroastrian myth of cosmic dualism states that there is a great battle between good and evil, with the obligation of people to join the true religion in opposition to false religions, to side with the true God against “satanic” other deities and their religions.

True believers are obligated to convert or dominate unbelievers, and also to embrace the punitive destruction of unbelievers to their particular religion, whether by temporal destruction or belief in eternal destruction.

Other scholars state that the theme of Zoroastrian apocalypse by fire was also a notable influence in shaping Western religious thought.

https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803133541558

https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv1b9f5v8

Joseph Azzi, and others, offer some stunning information on the influence of Jewish Christianity (i.e. Ebionism) on Islam- “The Priest and Prophet: The Christian Priest, Waraqa Ibn Nawfal’s, Profound Influence Upon Muhammad, The Prophet of Islam”.

Background:

Ebionism was an early Jewish-Christian sect, similar to the Nazarenes, that emerged within the Jewish movement between 30-80 CE. Ebionites were known as the “poor ones” who zealously followed the Jewish law (Torah). They opposed the priests in Jerusalem and the sacrifice industry, as Jesus did. They rejected the doctrine of the virgin birth of Jesus and the divinity of Jesus (i.e. rejecting Christian Trinity myths), viewing Jesus as a great teacher/prophet, but only human.

A source on this:

https://jamestabor.com/ebionites-nazarenes-tracking-the-original-followers-of-jesus/

The Ebionites were eventually persecuted by Paul’s branch of Christianity as a heretical movement and consequently their sect was scattered abroad, with some Ebionites migrating to the Arabian Peninsula and Mecca, where centuries later their Ebionite religion had a significant influence on Muhammad and his authorship of the Quran.

(Historians note that there is much diversity within all the early sects of Jewish Christianity, including within Ebionism.)

The influence of Jewish Christianity on Muhammad was mediated through the ministry of the Ebionite priest Waraqa. Islamic theologians/scholars suggest, defensively, that the influence of Waraqa was more of post-validation of Muhammad’s visions and insights. However, the evidence suggests that Waraqa’s influence was more of preceding and shaping Muhammad’s thought and writing.

Quotes from Joseph Azzi’s book:

“Waraqa… was an Ebionite Christian priest who lived in Mecca at the same time as Muhammad … and was related to Muhammad by marriage… he was the cousin of Muhammad’s first wife Khadija… Muhammad learned Jewish Christianity from Waraqa before he had his first revelations…”

While some Islamic theologians/scholars reject the influence of Waraqa on Muhammad, Azzi urges, “The preeminent contributions of Waraqa should not be rejected… the spiritual impact he had on the future Arab Prophet” was significant.

Azzi notes the development of the Ebionite religion of Waraqa and the fact that Waraqa translated the Gospel of the Hebrews into Arabic. That gospel is an earlier version of the Gospel of Matthew.

Azzi says that the Quran recognizes the Gospel to the Hebrews- “There is widespread agreement between it and the Quran in matters such as duties, prayers and resurrection… the Quran recalls parables similar to those found in the Ebionite Gospel” (p.12).

Azzi then details the increasing involvement of Waraqa with Muhammad and his visions. Waraqa provides theological and spiritual insights to Muhammad from the gospels that he had translated, notably the gospel of the Hebrews and Matthew. Azzi adds the detail that after Waraqa died, Muhammad’s visions ceased.

“Waraqa and Khadijah cooperate together to prepare Muhammad for his mission. This requires a continuous tutelage with a particular spiritual emphasis”, p.21.

Further on the influence of the gospels of the Hebrews and Matthew on Muhammad, “During the forty-four years when Muhammad and Waraqa are closely involved with each other, the book that the priest is translating from Hebrew to Arabic is faithfully studied” p.23.

He adds, “The Hebrew Gospel… will play a significant role in the transfer of… orthodox doctrines into Muslim beliefs and practices” p.43.

Azzi continues, noting that Muhammad admits that another messenger and book informed him about the “right way” and affirms “that the Quran is really an authentication of the Hebrew book”, p.47. Azzi then quotes specific verses from the Quran that state this.

The shared themes of Jewish Christianity and Islam include a strong monotheism, a rejection of the divinity of Jesus, a rejection of his redemptive death on the cross and resurrection, obedience and submission to the deity, and severe threats of hellfire for infidels. Muhammad also embraced Jewish practices such as circumcision (p.92), water purification rituals, and prohibitions on alcohol and pork.

Add to this the Islamic embrace of apocalyptic mythology and other eschatological beliefs such as an end-time judgment followed by severe punishment.

Azzi concludes, “The teachings of Waraqa… are thoroughly embedded in the Quran…”

The author of one article (i.e. “Waraqa’s Influence on Muhammad”) says that Muslims play down Waraqa’s influence because it undermines their preferred belief “that Muhammad had been taught the Quran by Allah”. But the similarities with Ebionite Christianity and its Gospel to the Hebrews are undeniable, hence, “we have a paradox of world-historical proportions… the fact that Jewish Christianity indeed disappeared within the Christian church but was preserved in Islam”.

https://counteringislamism.wordpress.com/waraka/

Moving back to Azzi again, “Waraqa’s… ministry includes his selection of… Muhammad to be his successor as the head of the (Ebionite) church, an offshoot of a Jewish-Christian sect…”, p. 135.

Some further evidence of Muhammad borrowing from Waraqa’s gospel to the Hebrews or Matthew:

“The Quran itself declares that much of its ethical standards were built on previous scriptural systems…” p.107.

Then Azzi notes the varied parables in the Quran that were borrowed from Matthew, such as the Sower and the Seeds, the parable of the Rich man and the beggar Lazarus, the parable of the wise man who builds his house on solid rock, the parable of the fruitful tree and the unfruitful tree, the parable of the mustard seed, the parable of the faithful servant and the evil servant, and the parable of the ten bridesmaids, p.107-111.

“The Quran does not hesitate to recognize that it has borrowed heavily from the earlier scriptures”.

This presents a problem for Islamic believers, to recognize that their scriptures are borrowed from previous religious systems and are not as “divinely inspired” as they have been taught. Christians face the same sobering realization that their scriptures and beliefs are descended from the primitive mythologies of ancient people. All subsequent religious traditions reshape details in what they borrow but the essential content and themes of borrowed material remains the same.

Joseph Campbell summarized this descent of narrative themes across history in stating that people have believed the same primitive myths all across history and across all the cultures of the world. Myths of original paradise, early human sin that ruins paradise, great flood myths, life being cursed and becoming worse, eventually declining toward collapse and apocalyptic ending as punishment for human sin, demand for sacrifice/payment, suffering as redemptive, demand to engage a righteous battle against evil enemies, and the promise of restored paradise for true believers.

Moving along, Wendell Krossa

I would add this to Azzi’s points that the Quran borrowed from the Gospel to the Hebrews or Matthew’s Gospel. Note that the Quran makes this distinctly similar and obviously borrowed point from Matthew’s gospel- i.e. people rejecting the messenger and message, are condemned for rejecting the God being presented, and therefore are damned to hell.

In Matthew 11 Jesus rails against the villages that rejected his miracles (i.e. rejected the messenger and his message):

“Jesus began to denounce the towns in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. ‘Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida!… it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you…. You will go down to Hell (“cast into outer darkness… cast into the blazing furnace… where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth”)’”.

Then, affirming Azzi’s evidence of the Quran borrowing from the gospel to the Hebrews (Matthew’s gospel), the Quran repeatedly states that those who reject the prophet and his message, those who do not believe the message and the messenger, those who do not believe the Islamic God, are damned to hell.

The verses stating this in the Quran are too numerous and constant to list. But they are the very same statements as made in the gospels to the Hebrews and Matthew. An endless series of threats of the worst punishment imaginable- i.e. hellfire for refusing to believe the messenger, message, and God that is presented to them.

And yes, mixed among the threats in the Quran are scattered statements on divine mercy, kindness, etc. So also in the other Western religions- scattered “diamonds among d___”, to use Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy’s colorful language.

Also note that the Quran does not have the moderating influence of the “Q Wisdom Sayings” of Jesus that many Christians have learned to focus on, while they ignore the nastier stuff in their holy book. Many moderate Christians have learned to downplay the darker material in their scriptures, material that contradicts the central themes and message of Historical Jesus.

In all his borrowings from Jewish Christianity, the biggest blunder of Muhammad was to not include the powerful moderating influence of the actual message of Jesus. But Paul’s blunder was, arguably, far worse. Paul took the Palestinian wisdom sage Jesus who had protested the sacrifice industry, and died for that protest, and turned his protest against sacrifice into the Christ myth of a godman who came as the supreme sacrifice for all sin. A distortion and fraud of such scale/degree that it is hard to comprehend how it has survived to this day as truth in the minds of billions of people.

Bob Brinsmead on the anti-sacrifice message and ministry of Historical Jesus:

https://bobbrinsmead.com/the-historical-jesus-what-the-scholars-are-saying/

The guiding ideals/principles of Historical Jesus (i.e. his central teaching that, even while almost buried in the larger New Testament context, has continued to exert a potent moderating influence against the worst beliefs and impulses of the Christian tradition.):

Dominant themes in the message of Jesus :

“Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you. If you love only those who love you, what credit is that to you? Everyone finds it easy to love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Everyone can do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Most will lend to others, expecting to be repaid in full.

“But do something more heroic, more humane. (Live on a higher plane of human experience). Do not retaliate against your offenders/enemies with ‘eye for eye’ justice. Instead, love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then you will be just like God because God does not retaliate against God’s enemies. God does not mete out eye for eye justice. Instead, God is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked. God causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. Be unconditionally loving, just as your God is unconditionally loving”. (My paraphrase of Luke 6:32-36 or Matthew 5:38-48.)

This can be summarized in this single statement: “Love your enemy because God does”.

(Note: The moderating or humanizing influence of the above Jesus message is evident in the very content- i.e. what is said.)

Example of non-retaliatory, unconditional love: The Prodigal Father story in Luke 15:11-31.

The Father (representing God) did not demand a sacrifice, restitution, payment, apology, punishment, or anything else before forgiving, fully accepting, and loving the wasteful son.

The above statement and illustration by Jesus, overturns the highly conditional Christian religion and Paul’s Christ mythology. Paul, along with the rest of the New Testament, preached a retaliatory God who demanded full payment and punishment of all sin in a blood sacrifice of atonement before he would forgive, accept, and ultimately love anyone.

Weaving back to my larger point on these three Western religions…

The evidence from across history, on all three religions, affirms Harold Ellen’s point that the very same “cruel God” mythology in all three religions deforms human personality with fear, anxiety, shame guilt, despair and depression, nihilism, and violence (see “Cruel God, Kind God” by Zenon Lotufo).

Lotufo quoting Ellens:

“There is in Western culture a psychological archetype, a metaphor that has to do with the image of a violent and wrathful God… this image represents God sufficiently disturbed by the sinfulness of humanity that God had only two options: destroy us or substitute a sacrifice to pay for our sins. He did the latter. He killed Christ.

“Ellens goes on by stating that the crucifixion, a hugely violent act of infanticide or child sacrifice, has been disguised by Christian conservative theologians as a ‘remarkable act of grace’. Such a metaphor of an angry God, who cannot forgive unless appeased by a bloody sacrifice, has been ‘right at the center of the Master Story of the Western world for the last 2,000 years. And the unavoidable consequence for the human mind is a strong tendency to use violence’.

“’With that kind of metaphor at our center, and associated with the essential behavior of God, how could we possibly hold, in the deep structure of our unconscious motivations, any other notion of ultimate solutions to ultimate questions or crises than violence- human solutions that are equivalent to God’s kind of violence’…

“Hence, in our culture we have a powerful element that impels us to violence, a Cruel God Image… that also contributes to guilt, shame, and the impoverishment of personality…”.

As Harold Ellens says, “If your God uses force, then so may you, to get your way against your ‘enemies’”.

As Bob Brinsmead says, “We become just like the God that we believe in”.

Further, Jordan Peterson in his defense of Christianity as better than Islam, argues that Islam was spread by the sword. Well, balance that with the evidence that Christianity was also spread by the sword under Constantine, and in places like Latin America.

https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/interview-converting-by-the-sword

https://brooklynrail.org/2008/04/express/the-church-and-its-sins-constantines-sword/

http://www.belovedspear.org/2014/03/constantines-sword.html

All three Western religions are more similar on fundamental and dominant themes/beliefs than they are different in other areas. This raises the question of why there is such enmity and hatred between members of these religions when they share basic common beliefs?

Notably, they all share the same “core problem”, their inheritance of Zoroaster’s cosmic dualism that validates the human tribalism of a good religion set in obligatory conflict with evil enemies who differ (among the many other tribal dualisms that people construct to separate themselves from differing others in relationships of enmity, hatred, and outright war- i.e. dualisms based on race/ethnicity, nationality, ideology, etc.).

Add the Western religious theologies of the divine ideal of domination/submission relating, and justice as punitive destruction, both temporal and eternal. These core ideals/beliefs shape the very nature of the deity of Western religions, deity as the long-standing ultimate ideal and authority of humanity.

It’s not about a competition for which religion is “better or worse”. All three share the same heritage of bad ideas and all fail by embracing and promoting the same theology of a violent, vengeful God as the cohering center of their complexes of primitive myths. And all have histories of true believers finding validation for bad behavior based on the nature of their deity (using the “behavior validated by belief” relationship).

All three religions have major flaws, so stop the comparative arguments and the defense and blaming the other as worse, when all three share the same common fundamental beliefs. I am reminded here also of Dominic Crossan’s point (Jesus Seminar) that it is unethical to state that another person’s belief is “demonic” in contrast with your belief in the very same thing. He was referring to early Christians claiming that the Roman belief in virgin birth was demonic (i.e. Emperors/Caesars born of virgins) compared to the Christian belief in the very same thing.

Adherents of all three Western religions need to engage the Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy approach of discerning the “diamonds from the dung” in the mix of their beliefs and practices, harsh as that lands on true believer ears. That is the fundamental responsibility of everyone of us- i.e. to discern bad from good in all areas of life.

The project of distinguishing good from bad requires that true believers cease the blind denial of bad elements in the mix of their belief systems and cease defending their entire traditions without exercising responsible re-evaluation of the nasty features in the mix. Recognize what is valuable in your tradition, what affirms authentic humaneness, but then also acknowledge what in your belief system incites and validates the worst of human impulses to tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction of differing others.

And most critical to any thorough reformism project- Go to the core of belief systems, the “cohering center” that is the ultimate ideal and authority of deity. We all become just like the God that we believe in. If our God is tribal then so also we will become tribal in our thinking, feeling, motivations, and behavior. And if our God dominates others as iconic “Lord/King” then so we will find validation for the same domination of others. And if our God solves problems with punitive violence then so may we resort to the same inhumane treatment of failing others.

The same prominent themes frame the narratives in the holy books of all three Western religions.

Where to next, then?

Go directly to the “Mother of all roots of a problem, the most influential of contributing root factors.” Replace the core of religious theology- i.e. God theory- with the central Jesus insight on God as universal, unconditional love. His “stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God”. A theology that rejected Zoroastrian cosmic dualism and tribal opposition between differing groups of people, meaning the rejection of favoring and only including true believers while excluding unbelievers. A God defined by the “greatness of serving others, not lording over others”. A God who did not engage the punitive destruction of “eye for eye” retaliatory justice as in apocalypse and hell myths.

Then end the struggle for your religion to dominate in society over others that you believe fundamentally differ in adverse/detrimental ways, but actually do not differ in terms of basic beliefs and practices.

Then take the “diamond features” out of religious systems (out of the deforming influence of religious context) and frame them as common features of the human spirit- i.e. the diamonds of common forgiveness, mercy, kindness, love, generosity, and other common human features that are practiced by religious people and atheists alike. The common goodness of the common human spirit.

Or if you choose to remain in a religious tradition, understand that what is good in your system is not due to some mysterious influence from your religion. It is due to the human spirit that exhibits goodness in all sorts of contexts, despite surrounding influences that may undermine or deform the common impulse to good.

Now to the most critical reform of all

The central breakthrough insight of Historical Jesus, that God was an unconditional reality, is entirely contrary to the conditional beliefs and practices of religious traditions. Or to phrase it negatively as James Robinson did- “Jesus’ stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God… His greatest contribution to the history of human ideas”. I use “unconditional” which is a more encompassing term and includes the feature of “non-retaliatory”.

No conditional religion ever has, or can ever, communicate that liberating unconditional deity to humanity. Unconditional deity is contrary to any and all conditional religion. I don’t know how to state that any more clearly.

The no conditions love of God, as the ultimate human ideal, will remove the central validation used by people across history for bad behavior. God as no conditions love will leave people on their own if they choose to act badly in terms of exhibiting tribalism, domination, or punitive destruction of others. There is no such God of tribalism, domination, or punitive destruction. There never has been any such reality. It was always the construction of similarly structured primitive minds seeking to dominate and control their fellow tribe members with myths of such monstrous deities.

Unconditional deity will also spell the collapse of religious traditions as institutions mediating religious conditions to humanity through controlling religious authorities. Unconditional means “Absolutely no conditions. None”.

Add here, to further combat the human versions of tribalism that find validation in Zoroastrian cosmic dualism, the understanding of fundamental human oneness that is backed by the “Mitochondrial Eve” theory of human origins (i.e. all humans on Earth today are the descendants of a common African mother). Buttress this with quantum entanglement that affirms the fundamental oneness of all reality. And the insights of all-encompassing oneness as revealed in the Near-Death Experiences. In light of these insights, see through or past the divisiveness that religious traditions have long promoted among people.

The unconditional love taught by Historical Jesus is best expressed via Classic Liberalism with its protection of the rights and freedoms of all individual, equally. Rights as enumerated in the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, rights as stated in constitutions such as the US Constitution, rights and freedoms as protected by common law systems, and rights and freedoms as protected and promoted by representative institutions staffed with people who truly understand their agencies exist to serve citizens.

And so much more.

The Jesus message is a call to die to the old, and find rebirth in the new, much like the shaman’s experience of complete disintegration and then reintegration around something radically new (my paraphrase of that experience). I would frame the elements of rebirth and re-integration as taking place around insights like the stunning new theology of Jesus. It is a call to embrace a new life of truly human existence framed by the ideal of no conditions love for all. Something like the generosity of spirit and universalism that Nelson Mandela wrestled with and exhibited as a great example for us to follow.

And the Jesus insights function well in any human situation, because they are not religious insights and practices. He was not a religious man and did not intend to start another religion. That adds to the offensive deformity of the man in a world religion.

On the common Muslim hesitancy to recognize the actual origins of Islam in Jewish Christianity. The same hesitancy is felt among Christians, Wendell Krossa

As Christians (myself “former”, I left in late 70s) we were told that our beliefs/ideas came directly from God. They were given to special people (i.e. Paul’s heavenly visions) through divine inspiration with no mistakes. The biblical scriptures, written by the varied specially inspired people (i.e. gospel authors and others), was the authoritative “word of God” to be received, submitted to, and obeyed under threat of eternal damnation. You were never to doubt or question the holy book of our religion as that was sin of the highest order, and “deception by the devil” to boot.

It can be initially disconcerting, but later liberating, to discover that the beliefs that you had embraced are the very same as the beliefs of primitive peoples long before your religion embraced them. The beliefs of all our main world religions are adopted and adapted from the mythologies and religions of primitive people long before our religions were constructed by our founders. Our religions borrowed the same ideas created by others long before, adjusting bits here and there but keeping the main themes intact.

Hence, as Joseph Campbell has said, all people across history have believed the same primitive myths and across all the cultures of the world. Myths of creation, fall, original sin, flood, decline of life toward ending in apocalypse, demand for sacrifice/payment, demand for purging of evil in war of good against evil threat, promise of future paradise. (Sources- Books by Joseph Campbell, Mircea Eliade, and many others on ancient mythologies.)

And note that in Christianity we have the “Christ-ianity” of Paul, not the true “Jesus-ianity” of the “Q Wisdom Sayings” gospel that is the closest that we get to what Jesus actually taught.

Within Christianity and its bible, there is a profound and irreconcilable contradiction between the message of Jesus and the religion of Paul. Christianity has merged two entirely opposite messages thus creating the epitome of an oxymoronic combination of things, that has resulted in cognitive dissonance unheard of anywhere before in history.

Here again is my complex of basic themes that have influenced all the great religions and still dominate both religious and secular systems of belief, Wendell Krossa

“The apocalyptic millennial complex is better understood when fleshed out as the larger complex of primitive myths that includes-

“(1) The baseline myth of a lost original paradise- i.e. a better past that “corrupt, evil humans” have ruined. That undergirds the sense of the loss of something good and, hence, now unbalanced justice demands that that the lost good must be restored in order to rebalance justice and righteousness in the cosmos and life. To make things right again.

“Consequent to the myth of a better past that has been ruined, primitive mythology pivoted to (2) blame people, to blame humanity as the evil enemy that must be punished and even exterminated in order to restore the lost paradise and to save life. In contemporary terms- today the evil enemy of nature is greedy, consuming humans in industrial civilization (“humanity as ‘virus, cancer’ on the Earth”). And even more specifically today, greedy humans using natural resources like fossil fuels that enables them to enjoy the good life.

“Then to further re-enforce the narrative that evil humans had ruined divine and pure nature (i.e. Earth as goddess), the ancients added the ongoing threat that (3) life was declining toward apocalyptic ending. And to even further re-enforce alarm, apocalyptic prophets repeatedly set “always imminent” dates to raise hysteria levels and validate the use of desperate measures (elites using state coercion) to “save” the world that is always threatened by the looming apocalypse.

“But also, the apocalyptic alarmists introduced “hope” into the mix, the perverse version of hope that was built on the violent destruction of enemies. And they create salvation schemes where specially enlightened elites lecture the ignorant and unenlightened commoners on what they must do to be saved from imminent destruction and death- i.e. (4) demand some sacrifice/payment. Today’s sacrifice- “de-growth, de-development”, as a return to primitivism as in a return to the more pure and strong existence of “noble savage” life as hunter-gathers with no ecological footprint. Add to this sacrifice/payment element, the redistribution programs pushed in the endless annual climate COPs.

“Couch this madness in a deformed version of the hero’s quest where those identifying as true heroes will engage a righteous tribal battle to conquer and (5) violently purge a purported monster/enemy framed as demonized fellow humans.

“And when the enemy is fully purged/exterminated, then (6) salvation is attained in a renewed communal paradise.

“Most critical to understand in this set of primitive themes is- What is the driving Force behind this complex? What is the “cohering center” of this complex that has wreaked so much destruction across history? What validates the rest of the primitive and distorting ideas in the complex?

“The cohering center is none other than the “wrathful” deity of all primitive mythologies, the deity royally pissed at humans for ruining his original perfect paradise. Hence, the subsequent threats of divine retaliation toward humanity by violently destroying the entire world in an apocalypse. The mother of all hissy fits. Followed by divine demands for sacrifice/payment/suffering as required conditions to achieve redemption.

“The cohering center of the apocalyptic millennial complex of myths is the violent, destroying God who threatens people in this life through natural disasters, disease, accidents, and predatory cruelty, and also threatens people with after-life harm that adds sting to death. That “monster God” is the central issue to deal with in apocalyptic millennial complexes of myths. This psycho-pathological vision of deity has dominated mythologies and religions across history and has now been transformed into secular/ideological systems of belief to also dominate those. I.e. “Vengeful Gaia, punitive Universe, angry Planet/Mother Earth, payback karma”, etc.

“These deeply embedded themes, long entrenched in human psyches as subconscious archetypes, help explain why emotional satisfaction, not rational evidence is behind our choice in beliefs. Hence, many people simply respond to contemporary apocalyptic millennial narratives, whether Marxist collectivism or climate apocalyptic, because they feel right, good, just, and true. They resonate with deeply embedded archetypes.”

“Representing, fulfilling?”, Wendell Krossa

Previous comments on the shared bad ideas in all three Western religions– i.e. Judaism, Christianity, Islam- are below this top section. Those common bad ideas have incited and validated incalculable harm and violence across history and will continue to do so until they are confronted, changed, and new alternatives are found to replace them. Some of the worst of bad ideas are the features used to define human understanding of deity, the cohering center of human systems of belief and, from the beginning, humanity’s ultimate ideal and authority.

We have the alternatives to bad religious ideas offered in the “stunning new theology” of sages like Historical Jesus but as Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy said, the Jesus “diamonds” have been distorted and buried by Paul’s Christ myth that dominates the New Testament. (Note: Until the great contradictions, such as between Paul and Jesus at the core of Christianity, are confronted and understood, all religious reformism is just tinkering at the periphery that leaves the core of the problem- i.e. the pathologies in deity theories- in place and nothing really changes with the central archetypes/themes of human narratives.)

What’s the issue? This site, among varied concerns, is about ultimate freedom, ultimate safety and security, an ultimate assurance that “It’s going to be alright, for everyone, ultimately.” That is a big background re-assurance thing. The one thing we hold onto as we go through the worst in life.

The last, most critical phase of human freedom, is liberation from the “threat theology” that has enslaved human minds and spirits across history and continues to deform human personalities today in both religious and secular/ideological versions. Threat theology is very much the same old totalitarian’s formula of “Fear=control” that emerged with the earliest shaman taking fellow tribals down into those caves to scare the bejesus out of them with that anamorphic cave art. Such was the origin of art and religion according to prehistory expert John Pfeiffer in “Explosion: An Inquiry Into the Origins of Art and Religion”.

This site agrees with Bob Brinsmead that if there is no true freedom, then there is no authentic love. Freedom and love are inseparable twins. So don’t talk about “God is love” if your God embraces any of the features of threat theology that denies people true freedom from fear.

(Common features of threat theology: Anger/wrath in deity. Deity as tribal- favoring true believers, rejecting and damning unbelievers. Deity as Lord/King/Ruler, enforcing human submission under threat of damnation. Deity as punitive Destroyer in apocalypse and hell, etc.)

A note on the claim of Christianity to “represent/proclaim” Jesus, and the claim of Islam that it is the “fulfillment” of Jesus (and Moses), Wendell Krossa

https://counteringislamism.wordpress.com/waraka/

The author of “Waraqa’s Influence on Muhammad” notes that Islam claims to be “the fulfillment” of Moses and Jesus, taking them to their ultimate meaning. But Islam cannot make that claim with regard to Jesus and then ignore his actual message and his single most profound insight- i.e. his breakthrough insight on theology that God is an unconditional deity. That stunning new theology contradicts entirely the threat theologies of all ancient mythologies and the threat theologies of all religious traditions since.

The new theology of Jesus directly overturned the idea that God was a threatening deity. Read what he actually stated in the Matthew 5:38-48 and Luke 6:27-36 summaries of his central theme- “There must be no more eye for eye retaliation but instead love your enemies because God does. How so? God generously gives sun and rain, the two most critical gifts for agrarian society, to everyone alike, to both good and bad people. So be unconditionally merciful and generous just like God.” (My paraphrase of that message)

That is what James Robinson calls “the stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God… Jesus’ greatest contribution to the history of human ideas.”

“Non-retaliatory” hits the negative side of the theology. More comprehensively it is a statement of a stunningly inexpressible unconditional love in deity.

That stunning new theology of Jesus overturns entirely the psychopathology of threat theology that has darkened and enslaved human minds from the beginning of human mythmaking and all the way through the great world religions down to the “secular/ideological” gods of the modern era (i.e. “vengeful Gaia, angry Planet/Mother Earth, punitive Universe, payback karma”, including versions like the cold and callous “Self-Organizing Principle” of “science”.).

What did Historical Jesus actually say in his stunning new theology? He stated that, in his new theology, there was no anger, no threat of punishment, no judgment, no exclusion of anyone from the love of God, and no hell.

There was only “no conditions love” for all- i.e. “sun and rain given to both good and bad people”, without exclusion. That meant no tribal division between “true believers/unbelievers”. Hence, no such thing as a “cosmic dualism” between God and Satan. Only ultimate oneness that is love.

The Prodigal Father story, told by Jesus, further illustrated the unconditional nature of God. There was no sacrifice demanded before forgiving failing people, no conditions before God would love them and welcome them generously and fully along with everyone else.

No religion can make the claim to “fulfill Jesus” if it ignores his very message on the nature of love as unconditional and if it ignores his central theological insight on God as unconditional love.

But yes, Islam “fulfills” the beliefs of Jewish Christianity on a variety of issues such as the rejection of Jesus as a sacrifice for sin (his redemptive death), the rejection of his virgin birth and divinity. And Islam embraced Jewish water purification and so on. Islam further embraced the features associated with Paul’s Christ myth- i.e. judgment and severe punishment for refusing the message/messenger (i.e. hellfire), and the demand for obedience and submission to God, etc.

However, those beliefs and practises have nothing to do with Historical Jesus, his message and his new theology.

So also, Christianity can not make the claim to represent Jesus, to be the religion of Jesus, and then distort and bury his message, his breakthrough insight on an unconditional God, with the Christ myth of Paul and its highly conditional salvation scheme (i.e. the supreme condition of the sacrifice of Jesus as a godman to pay for all sin and thereby appease the wrath of Paul’s God).

Both these religions fail on the most critical points- i.e. a clear embrace and promotion of the actual message and theology of Jesus.

More to the point, they cannot embrace Jesus’ message and theological insight because that message and insight spells the end of all conditional religion, all religious conditions. According to Jesus, the entirety of theology is summed in the statement that “God is unconditional love”. Hence, the summary of his message as “Love your enemies unconditionally because God loves them unconditionally”. An entirely non-religious message.

And, as always, when commenting on the “stunning new theology of Jesus” (James Robinson) I add those necessary qualifiers that the nature of Ultimate Reality, while presenting an aspirational ideal for human thought, emotion, motivation, and response, it is not prescriptive for criminal justice systems obligated first and foremost to protect the innocent by restraining/incarcerating violent people.

The stunning new theology of Historical Jesus works to challenge the cohering center of human narratives, overturning deforming myths like cosmic dualism, threatening forces/spirits behind the natural world, and varied other religious archetypes that have long incited and validated the worst impulses in people.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Your’s is fiction. Mine is history.

Milei fights for freedom. Happer fights climate alarmism. I fight the harmful/destructive psychopathologies in religious traditions.

Topics below:

On the claims of Christianity and Islam to “Represent/fulfill” that wisdom sage? Not if you ignore his core message and themes. More on the shared “bad ideas” in the major religious traditions.

And the “holy shitoli” presentation of Javier Milei at Davos. That is what courage and common sense looks and sounds like. The “Populism” that he speaks to is commoners pushing back against dominating elites who have abandoned common sense Classic Liberalism and persistently try to re-establish the elite/commoner divide in societies.

Then see below the Ken Haapala summary of the William Happer presentation on the warming influence of CO2. That warming influence is now “saturated” and increasing levels of CO2 will not contribute much, if anything, to any more warming.

Further, the warming that we have had so far (1.2 degree C over past century) has been beneficial to all life. And the rise in CO2 has also been beneficial to all life. We need more of both to get back to the optimal, natural levels for most of the Phanerozoic history of life, when all life flourished with more of its basic food and warmth- i.e. CO2 in the multiple-thousands of ppm, and temperatures up to 10 C warmer than today (i.e. the Eocene “mammalian paradise” of some 55-33 million years ago). The oceans did not “boil” and the planet did not ignite on fire in that world that was entirely free of ice for over 80% of its history.

Why did the oceans not “boil” (an ignorant alarmist exaggeration)? Because that extra heat energy is transported via ocean and atmospheric convection currents to the colder polar regions to naturally warm those areas and benefit life there. The media hysteria over melting ice and faster Arctic warming is a denial of natural states and climate processes. See the research on the natural factor of “meridional transport”, that Javier Vinos argues is the main influence on climate change. He posts his reports on “co2coalition.org” and “Wattsupwiththat.com”.

Sample of Vinos’ reports:

https://co2coalition.org/news/the-sun-climate-effect-the-winter-gatekeeper-hypothesis-parts-i-ii/

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/02/01/tom-nelson-interviews-javier-vinos/

Why do elites like Mark Carney have such difficultly grasping this basic science of climate presented by experts like atmospheric physicist Happer and others?

The conclusion from Happer’s research? There is no scientific reason to tax carbon or decarbonize our societies. There is no “climate crisis”.

More on site themes: Wendell Krossa

Is there any greater cultic delusion today than “Lets destroy human civilization (i.e. degrowth, de-development, decarbonization) to “save the world” from an imagined climate apocalypse with no science to affirm it.

“Apocalyptic has been the most violent and destructive idea in history”, Arthur Mendel in “Vision and Violence.” Add the totalitarian’s formula “fear=control” (elite control of commoners). Their motivating reward for terrorizing populations is the money that flows afterwards, money from commoners to controlling elites.

Cultic delusion and a host of associated psychopathologies are detailed in reports by journalists Michael Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi and Walter Kirn, and many others.

See another of Taibbi and Kirn’s excellent weekly reports on the corruption behind our supposedly liberal democracies. An expose of unbelievable hypocrisy in the “Yellings” (not Hearings, according to Kirn).

“America This Week, Jan. 31, 2025: ‘The Apostate Hearings- RFK, Warren, and Democrat-on-Democrat Crime: Walter attends the Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. hearings. We discuss highlights and (mostly) lowlights”, Matt Taibbi, Walter Kirn.

https://www.racket.news/p/transcript-america-this-week-jan-e1d

Among other things, Kirn and Taibbi discuss the Tuskegee experiment by “the US public health service. In other words, if you’re going to sit and declare the inviolable sanctity and virtue of the United States Health bureaucracy (as Elizabeth Warren does), let’s bring up the fact that that very bureaucracy, which this guy wants to reform and which you’re running him down for not being properly reverent toward, ran an experiment to give people syphilis and then watched them and see what happened.”

Some reporter has tried to vilify RFK, claiming that he will do another Tuskegee experiment on Americans, to kill millions of them, if he is confirmed.

They expose the hypocrisy of Senators like Warren who have been beneficiaries of major donations from the drug companies while she yells at Kennedy to not sue them. Astounding. She took almost a million dollars from drug companies for her last Senate run in 2019-20.

This from Joe Rogan and guest on secret experiments performed by US state agencies on Americans without their knowledge. No longer dismissible as “conspiracy theories”.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLsuq3Zbcog

Also, this great brief (4 mins) by Joe Rogan and guest Gad Saad (actually a happy guy). Wendell Krossa

I sent this post to a discussion group:

“Just a couple of minutes (4 mins) of Joe and Gad on Elon Musk as “the most attacked man on Earth”. Joe rightly notes that without Musk buying Twitter, we would be far less free today. That began the exposure of the behind-the-scenes censorship infrastructure that Shellenberger, Taibbi and others have continued to expose…. And how that was undermining democracy and freedom today in Western liberal democracies. It continues, backed by governments across Western civilization.

“They both note how critical that move was by Musk to buy Twitter and what world we would have been in, had he not done that. Gad is right that was the most critically important thing that Musk has done to save freedom/democracy. Without that, we would still be controlled by the ridiculous Woke ideology dominating public social media discourse and news media.

“As Joe says, that ideology would have been used by states “to control people under the guise of protecting marginalized people”. That gets to the virtue-signaling in “the psychopathology of left-wing authoritarianism, the deformity of left-wing compassion” that enacts policies to produce mass-harm that left-wing people deny.

“Also, Joe’s interview of Mike Benz is still important to view as he details the growth of the censorship infrastructure, its many fronts and projects, its goals, etc. That is the larger context of what they are discussing here.

“As Joe says, it’s all about power, control and they- state elites- will use whatever they can to get their way- whether “DEI, Green energy bullshit”, etc. They are not doing it because they are trying to “save you”. That’s nonsense, says Rogan.” (End of discussion group post)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6du_fgzYKA

“Representing, fulfilling?”, Wendell Krossa

Previous comments on the shared bad ideas in all three Western religions– i.e. Judaism, Christianity, Islam- are below this top section. Those common bad ideas have incited and validated incalculable harm and violence across history and will continue to do so until they are confronted, changed, and new alternatives are found to replace them. Some of the worst of bad ideas are the features used to define human understanding of deity, the cohering center of human systems of belief and, from the beginning, humanity’s ultimate ideal and authority.

We have the alternatives to bad religious ideas offered in the “stunning new theology” of sages like Historical Jesus but as Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy said, the Jesus “diamonds” have been distorted and buried by Paul’s Christ myth that dominates the New Testament. (Note: Until the great contradictions, such as between Paul and Jesus at the core of Christianity, are confronted and understood, all religious reformism is just tinkering at the periphery that leaves the core of the problem- i.e. the pathologies in deity theories- in place and nothing really changes with the central archetypes/themes of human narratives.)

What’s the issue? This site, among varied concerns, is about ultimate freedom, ultimate safety and security, an ultimate assurance that “It’s going to be alright, for everyone, ultimately.” That is a big background re-assurance thing. The one thing we hold onto as we go through the worst in life.

The last, most critical phase of human freedom, is liberation from the “threat theology” that has enslaved human minds and spirits across history and continues to deform human personalities today in both religious and secular/ideological versions. Threat theology is very much the same old totalitarian’s formula of “Fear=control” that emerged with the earliest shaman taking fellow tribals down into those caves to scare the bejesus out of them with that anamorphic cave art. Such was the origin of art and religion according to prehistory expert John Pfeiffer in “Explosion: An Inquiry Into the Origins of Art and Religion”.

This site agrees with Bob Brinsmead that if there is no true freedom, then there is no authentic love. Freedom and love are inseparable twins. So don’t talk about “God is love” if your God embraces any of the features of threat theology that denies people true freedom from fear.

(Common features of threat theology: Anger/wrath in deity. Deity as tribal- favoring true believers, rejecting and damning unbelievers. Deity as Lord/King/Ruler, enforcing human submission under threat of damnation. Deity as punitive Destroyer in apocalypse and hell, etc.)

A note on the claim of Christianity to “represent/proclaim” Jesus, and the claim of Islam that it is the “fulfillment” of Jesus (and Moses), Wendell Krossa

https://counteringislamism.wordpress.com/waraka/

The author of “Waraqa’s Influence on Muhammad” notes that Islam claims to be “the fulfillment” of Moses and Jesus, taking them to their ultimate meaning. But Islam cannot make that claim with regard to Jesus and then ignore his actual message and his single most profound insight- i.e. his breakthrough insight on theology that God is an unconditional deity. That stunning new theology contradicts entirely the threat theologies of all ancient mythologies and the threat theologies of all religious traditions since.

The new theology of Jesus directly overturned the idea that God was a threatening deity. Read what he actually stated in the Matthew 5:38-48 and Luke 6:27-36 summaries of his central theme- “There must be no more eye for eye retaliation but instead love your enemies because God does. How so? God generously gives sun and rain, the two most critical gifts for agrarian society, to everyone alike, to both good and bad people. So be unconditionally merciful and generous just like God.” (My paraphrase of that message)

That is what James Robinson calls “the stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God… Jesus’ greatest contribution to the history of human ideas.”

“Non-retaliatory” hits the negative side of the theology. More comprehensively it is a statement of a stunningly inexpressible unconditional love in deity.

That stunning new theology of Jesus overturns entirely the psychopathology of threat theology that has darkened and enslaved human minds from the beginning of human mythmaking and all the way through the great world religions down to the “secular/ideological” gods of the modern era (i.e. “vengeful Gaia, angry Planet/Mother Earth, punitive Universe, payback karma”, including versions like the cold and callous “Self-Organizing Principle” of “science”.).

What did Historical Jesus actually say in his stunning new theology? He stated that, in his new theology, there was no anger, no threat of punishment, no judgment, no exclusion of anyone from the love of God, and no hell.

There was only “no conditions love” for all- i.e. “sun and rain given to both good and bad people”, without exclusion. That meant no tribal division between “true believers/unbelievers”. Hence, no such thing as a “cosmic dualism” between God and Satan. Only ultimate oneness that is love.

The Prodigal Father story, told by Jesus, further illustrated the unconditional nature of God. There was no sacrifice demanded before forgiving failing people, no conditions before God would love them and welcome them generously and fully along with everyone else.

No religion can make the claim to “fulfill Jesus” if it ignores his very message on the nature of love as unconditional and if it ignores his central theological insight on God as unconditional love.

But yes, Islam “fulfills” the beliefs of Jewish Christianity on a variety of issues such as the rejection of Jesus as a sacrifice for sin (his redemptive death), the rejection of his virgin birth and divinity. And Islam embraced Jewish water purification and so on. Islam further embraced the features associated with Paul’s Christ myth- i.e. judgment and severe punishment for refusing the message/messenger (i.e. hellfire), and the demand for obedience and submission to God, etc.

However, those beliefs and practises have nothing to do with Historical Jesus, his message and his new theology.

So also, Christianity can not make the claim to represent Jesus, to be the religion of Jesus, and then distort and bury his message, his breakthrough insight on an unconditional God, with the Christ myth of Paul and its highly conditional salvation scheme (i.e. the supreme condition of the sacrifice of Jesus as a godman to pay for all sin and thereby appease the wrath of Paul’s God).

Both these religions fail on the most critical points- i.e. a clear embrace and promotion of the actual message and theology of Jesus.

More to the point, they cannot embrace Jesus’ message and theological insight because that message and insight spells the end of all conditional religion, all religious conditions. According to Jesus, the entirety of theology is summed in the statement that “God is unconditional love”. Hence, the summary of his message as “Love your enemies unconditionally because God loves them unconditionally”. An entirely non-religious message.

And, as always, when commenting on the “stunning new theology of Jesus” (James Robinson) I add those necessary qualifiers that the nature of Ultimate Reality, while presenting an aspirational ideal for human thought, emotion, motivation, and response, it is not prescriptive for criminal justice systems obligated first and foremost to protect the innocent by restraining/incarcerating violent people.

The stunning new theology of Historical Jesus works to challenge the cohering center of human narratives, overturning deforming myths like cosmic dualism, threatening forces/spirits behind the natural world, and varied other religious archetypes that have long incited and validated the worst impulses in people.

This is what “speaking truth to power” looks like. A courageous anti-Wokeism champion- Javier Milei

This speech evoked a “Holy Fuckoli, and holy shitoli”, from me.

Damn, this is refreshing clarity and straightforwardness. Heroic figures like Javier Milei are not cowed by threats, smears, or vilification. With steel in his spine, he stood and bluntly stated the case for freedom. Listen to him (link below) condemn the very people sitting in front of him (Klaus Schab and Co) for pushing “bad ideas” in that very forum, the dangerous and destructive ideas of Woke Progressive collectivism.

Did they invite him back because, unwilling to admit it themselves publicly, they now realize how wrong they have been? Do they sense the emerging and strengthening populist pushback building across Western societies against their leftist Woke Progressive extremism? Do they, cowardly, feel that they need some outside voice to speak the truths that they are beginning to recognize as common sense?

Here is Milei giving his second speech to the Davos WEF Woke Progressive socialists. Amazingly, they asked him back when last year he also stood there and told them how wrong and dangerous their ideology was- i.e. Woke Progressivism infecting societies as the new front for collectivism. Here he speaks the same points as last year, right to their faces. He repeatedly reminds the audience in front of him that the perversions and dangers of Wokeism have been promoted by forums like the very WEF group that he is speaking to.

His begins his speech with some history of the amazing success of capitalism:

Milei notes that when the West elevated people’s individual liberty above tyrants, this new liberalism then unleashed human creativity and the process of wealth generation that has grown 20-fold since. The new era in human history began in the early 1800s and has now lifted 90% of the human population out of poverty. Even as the human population increased 8-fold over the same time frame. This amazing success has been due to the fundamentally new values of respect for life, liberty, and property and all the freedoms of Western civilization that we value today (i.e. free speech, free trade, etc.).

Milei then interjects with a statement re the lead example of the creative innovation that has emerged from societies of freedom- i.e. Elon Musk. He notes how Wokeism has vilified Musk recently for an exuberant hand wave while expressing gratitude to an audience. The very same arm extension that is used repeatedly in speeches by AOC, Bill and Hilary Clinton, and many others. But not a peep from Wokesters about those exact same arm stretches. Ah, the pathetic and sickening pettiness of extremist tribalism.

Milei continues, stating that the West lost its way over past decades as collectivists saw opportunity during crises to take control and redistribute the wealth that capitalism had created. Collectivists did that through centralized planning, setting in motion a process whose disastrous consequences we are suffering today.

And this- “The elite class promoted a socialist agenda while insidiously operating within the “liberal” paradigm. This new political class distorted the values of liberalism. They replaced freedom with “liberation” using the coercive power of the state to redistribute the wealth created by capitalism”.

He goes on to explain how the collectivist redistribution was justified by ideas of Marxist “social justice” that enabled state elites and bureaucrats to gain ever-more power through ever-further expansion of the state, arguing that the state must provide for ever-more basic “equity” rights.

He says further that we have moved away from individual freedom to “liberation through state intervention”. Wokeism is built on this framework and upheld through varied state institutions whose purpose is to penalize dissent.

He notes the varied related crusades/movements, like radical environmentalism, that view humanity as a cancer to be eradicated and economic development as a crime against nature.

It’s hard to believe that the WEF chiefs invited him back to state these things once again to their faces. Kind of like the Golden Globes inviting Ricky Gervais back repeatedly to insult the Hollywood elites to their faces and make them squirm with joking references to their protection of Harvey Weinstein over past years, and associations with pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

Milei touches on the many destructive perversions of Wokeism as, for example, in 5-year-old children being subjected to trans activism when it is not possible for them to be aware of what they are being pushed into. And that if parents refuse to agree to the mutilation of their children’s bodies, then the state agents will coercively take over on behalf of “the best interests of the child”.

He adds that those who try to protect children, and other “victims”, are vilified and bullied with smears of “transphobia”, etc.

He courageously damns the “sinister and murderous” ideology of Marxism/collectivism now pushed in Wokeism and he condemns the WEF as a major player- “This organization, along with international bodies, have been the main ideologues of this barbarity”.

He then details how Woke progressives try to vilify and silence challenges to their perverse ideology through censorship or through legal means (i.e. criminalization of dissent). He says that beneath their rhetoric of “inclusion, diversity, democracy and tolerance”, which they often preach and which are blatant lies, they really desire to eliminate dissent, criticism, and ultimately freedom, in order to maintain their ideology and its benefits to themselves. He illustrates with the fact that European leaders are now pushing for censorship of those not supporting Woke ideology.

Woke is trying to replace free societies with coercive state collectivism and its redistribution programs. According to Milei, in Wokeism there are only two classes- i.e. those working to produce wealth, and on the other side, the beneficiaries of that wealth through state redistribution to state bureaucracies, media, and the “indoctrination centers disguised as universities”.

He says the political class hides behind well-meaning rhetoric. Others also point to this abuse of words/terms as the psychopathology of left-wing authoritarianism that virtue-signals with appeal to the left-wing perversion of “compassion” that actually harms the “victims” it claims to fight for.

He is helpful in explaining that state intervention leads to market distortions such as in pricing and the poverty that intervention and distortion produces. And how it kills economic growth. Wokeism is just a creation of “the party of the state” to justify state intervention and increase public spending.

To reclaim and restore the progress of the West, says Milei, will require drastic reduction in the size of the state. Also, drastic reduction of all international organizations, as the only way to root out this perverse system of Wokeism and give back to taxpayers what belongs to them.

The functions of the state, he argues, must again be limited to protecting life, liberty, and property. Additional state programs undermine the basic functions of government and lead to the suffering of all under the massively expanded states of today.

He is right that the only real conflict is between free citizens and the political caste of elites that cling to power and “double down” on efforts to censor, persecute, and destroy dissenters. As Richard Landes has noted, this has been the battle over the millennia- to establish the “elite/commoner divide” in societies. Fortunately, across the West today citizens are pushing back for the restoration of freedom and equality. The WEF, says Milei, if it is to take part in the growing revolution for freedom, it will have to admit its part in Woke Progressivism.

He argues for bravery to think in new ways, to move outside the consensus of elites and to reclaim truths that were obvious to our ancestors, truths that were at the core of Western success, meaning basically “freedom”, if we wish to halt this Wokeism path that is leading to catastrophe. He ends with his paraphrase of Trump- “Make the West great again.”

He then concludes- “Long live freedom, damn it.”

Note:

Milei’s comment on the surging movement of commoners to reclaim freedom today is a reference to the emergence of “populism” across Western liberal democracies. That movement is generally about the restoration of true democracy, true Classic Liberalism.

And how have the Woke Progressive elites responded? They are desperately trying to discredit populism as “far right, right wing extremism”, meaning dog whistle for “Nazism, fascism, right-wing authoritarianism”. But majorities now see through those distorting smears and reject the vilification of commoner’s simply wanting the restoration of freedom. In response, socialist Woke elites are doubling down trying to censor, silence, even criminalize the commoners who are challenging their control.

Woke Progressives continue their campaign to discredit the new heroes for freedom, notably Elon Musk, Giorgia Miloni of Italy, Trump, and others. But many citizens are seeing through the lies and propagandizing. This is encouraging news.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATNbGD37Dz0

Critical to human freedom is to sharply limit the number of state elites and bureaucrats that persistently seek to meddle in and control the lives of citizens.

Totalitarian elites and bureaucrats undermine citizen’s freedom by (1) taking their income (taxation) to redistribute (the arrogance of elites/bureaucrats that they know better how to spend people’s money and taking that freedom of choice from citizens by state force), and by (2) increasing the regulatory burden that is state intervention and control of citizens (again, the arrogance of state elites that they know better how all should live and choose).

Milton Freidman suggested that the optimal size of the state (all three levels- federal, state, municipal) should be at about 15% of GDP. That would result in “the most good for the most people”. And he was a strong empiricist.

The IMF gives these figures for the size of the GDP that various states consume (not sure if these figures include all levels of government):

“% of GDP; United States- 36.26; France- 58.34; Japan- 44.09; United Kingdom- 44.3; Sweden- 47.32; Australia at 38%, and Canada at 41%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_government_spending_as_percentage_of_GDP

The National Post article below… Canada’s massive expansion of the public sector under Trudeau.

“The federal public service needs downsizing and Poilievre’s the man to do it: The federal workforce has added around 111,000 staff members since Trudeau took office”, National Post View, Jan.26, 2025

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/the-federal-public-service-needs-downsizing-and-poilievres-the-man-to-do-it?tbref=hp

“Since the ascension of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the federal public service has grown by about 111,000 staff members — from about 257,000 during Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s last year in government, to roughly 368,000 in the 2023-24 fiscal year. That’s an increase of about 43 per cent. In the same period, the general population grew 15 per cent.

“The painfully inflated bureaucracy is a huge cost to taxpayers. But it also threatens to block much-needed reforms. Nearly a third of the federal workforce was hired under Trudeau-government values and have worked under the Trudeau government’s expectations. We can likely expect some reluctance to implement a new government’s desired changes, as appears to be the case in the United States.”

While President Donald Trump is trying to cut bureaucracy in part by eliminating DEI programs and personnel, “some bureaucrats have been accused of trying to conceal DEI programs by couching them in different language….”

Trudeau has expanded bureaucracies across the public sector but even that is not enough increase in state expansion and spending.

“It’s clear that even Trudeau, the public-sector cheerleader that he is, doesn’t think his current employees can do the work: every year, his spending on private consulting firms rises by another billion or so, reaching $15 billion in 2023.”

And on lying propaganda- Watch mainstream media today, as they have done unceasingly over the last decade with Trump, generate absolute hysteria over the Musk “Nazi salute”. The full video shows that it was nothing of the sort, but as Musk and others have explained, an exuberant gesture to express his gratefulness “from my heart to yours”.

Here, in the link below, is the brief speech (4 mins) of Elon Musk at one of the Trump Inauguration events. It exposes the great lie now being propagandized across the planet that it was a “Nazi salute”. Greg Gutfeld recently played video clips of the Clintons, AOC, and many other Democrats who use the very same arm extension in their speeches. And, of course, mainstream media remain silent on that.

I can not get over the ongoing insanity of the Woke Progressive distortion, exaggeration, and propagandizing over the past 10 years to smear opponents as “Right-wing, Nazi, Hitler, racist, fascist”. They refuse to give up the utter madness, nuttiness, lunacy of this childish behavior.

The context of “the salute”

Musk states in the video clip below that this last election “was a fork in the road of human civilization”. There are elections that come and go, he said, but “this one really mattered”. He then told the crowd, “Thank you for making it happen”.

He then slapped his hand on his chest over his heart, followed with the extension of his arm straight out. Similar again to the many Democrats who use the same arm motion in their speeches (the extended arm). He then put his hand on his heart again, saying, “My heart goes out to you (explaining his arm extension). It is thanks to you that the future of civilization is assured”.

It takes some horrific deformity of mind, twisted by tribal ideology and hatred of differing others, to intentionally misinterpret what he said and did. And then to vilify, demonize, and dehumanize the man for his speech and actions celebrating the reclaiming of freedom for civilization. Sheesh, eh.

Musk, a sincere friend of Jews, was trying to communicate that this was a critical election like no other, a turning point in the history of human civilization. This man sees the issues at stake with regard to human freedom and has taken horrific abuse in his stand for freedom. A rare and heroic figure to be celebrated.

Vivek, Ramaswamy, Javier Milei, Mike Benz, Matt Taibbi, Michael Shellenberger, and others also spell out the issues at stake and fill in the larger context of what has happened over past decades with the Woke Progressive corruption of our liberal democracies that has threatened the core values of our civilization.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Crr7j0udrc4

These former spy chiefs, fresh out of the CIA, go right to work at mainstream media outlets that operate as the propaganda arms for Democratic Woke Progressives, in direct contradiction to Frank Church’s 1970s warnings about the CIA controlling media narratives.

John Brennan continues his slippery explanations about the Hunter Biden laptop, defensively claiming that he was just acting honorably to protect the US from the bad guys when he and fellow spooks stated that the laptop “appears to have the hallmarks of Russian disinformation”.

OK, but then why not let the laptop be made public and thoroughly investigated? Why shut that story down completely (censorship) just before an election to tribally protect your guy? Some 10% of Biden voters said that if they had known that the laptop was real (the FBI knew it was real in 2019 and hid that information from the public), then that 10% would not have voted for Biden.

Here Matt Taibbi exposes the lying and propaganda role of Brennan….

“Ex-CIA Chief John Brennan Should Be Sent to Mars: Nothing is more dangerous than an out-of-work spy”, Matt Taibbi, Jan. 25, 2025

https://www.racket.news/p/ex-cia-chief-john-brennan-should

Some basic math on “landslides”- He represents the “common sense” 70%, Wendell Krossa

The US situation speaks to the greater populist pushback against the leftist Woke Progressivism that has tried, over past decades, to take control of our liberal democracies and install a new collectivism run by Progressive elites. Progressivism today operates to re-establish the ancient “elite/commoner” divide that overthrows the Classic Liberal protection of the rights and freedoms of all individuals, equally.

This from “New York Post”

“Most voters say country is on wrong track, demand ‘substantial change’: exit polls”

https://nypost.com/2024/11/05/us-news/election-exit-poll-seven-in-10-voters-say-us-going-in-wrong-direction/

Polls “ABC news- Heading into 2024, most Americans believe country headed in the wrong direction: Poll”

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/americans-country-headed-wrong-direction-poll/story?id=104633234

Polls have consistently shown that over past years, and right up to the Nov. 2024 election, some 70% of Americans stated that their country was on the wrong track with open border immigration (and newcomers not embracing Classic Liberal values), de-carceration policies and increased crime (i.e. decriminalization setting violent people free), and economic policies that enlarged the elite-dominated bureaucratic state in an expanding totalitarianism through escalating “redistribution taxation” to support the managerial state along with increased regulation to control the “ignorant” commoners.

Now Trump got roughly 50% of American’s votes in the election. That other 20%, who agreed with his policies and realized that their side was on the wrong track with their policies, held their noses and voted for the stink of Biden/Harris because of personal animosity toward the person of Trump. But Trump generally represented their views on policies. And they are grateful, even though many are afraid to admit this, that he was elected. So, his majority was a true “landslide” of historical proportion if you include that other 20%.

Why could they not vote for Trump? One reason- They were thoroughly duped about the man due to the constant bombardment of media lies over past years that he was “Hitler, a dictator, a Nazi, a fascist, a racist, etc.”. And they were deluded by that greatest of all lies- i.e. that he was in hock to the Russians. Locked into that 24/7 flood of propaganda, and fearful to challenge it, many of the 20% felt they had no other choice but to vote against their best interests.

I share some cringing at the malefactions/transgressions of the man in the past, especially at his petty vengefulness toward critics and sometimes childish name-calling, mocking the physical appearance of others with ad hominem attacks. But that Butler bullet through his ear did change the man and like all of us, he gets the follow-up chances to make changes to temper his past behavior, to grow, develop, and mature. And he appears to be doing well on that score.

Further, to the positive, he is just such an entertainingly funny guy. And so smart on critical issues like foreign policy and fundamental economics.

Hence, the muted protests now as Trump enacts the promises that he made. Those other 20% who did not vote for him, undoubtedly still affirm his actions now on common sense policies to keep all safe and secure (border and crime), and to increase the prosperity of all citizens.

And that is what populism is today- a majority of common-sense citizens who want a return to true liberal democracy. Hence, despite ongoing leftist Woke Progressivism smearing populism as “far right, right-wing”, Winston Marshall has rightly stated that “populism is democracy”. The movement consists of moderate leftists, centrists and independents, and moderate conservatives, among others.

Trump represents the worldwide populist pushback against the destructive policies of far-left Woke Progressivism that tried to take command of liberal democracies over the past decade. That neo-collectivism continues to ruin Britain and Germany. Over past decades Woke Progressivism merged with climate alarmism, both driven by the same collectivist apocalyptic millennial themes.

Haapala on Happer- “There is no ‘climate crisis’… We should have the courage to do nothing about CO2 emissions. Nothing needs to be done.”

These quotes from William Happer’s article below:

“As a scientist who actually knows a lot about climate (and I set up many of our climate research centers when I was at the Department of Energy in the early 1990s) I can assure you that there is no climate emergency. There will not be a climate emergency. … Policies to address this phony climate emergency will cause great damage to American citizens and to their environment….”

“(CO2) is not a pollutant at all, and we should have the courage to do nothing about CO2 emissions. Nothing needs to be done.”

https://www.independent.org/issues/article.asp?id=13458

A summary of the above report (see all illustrative graphs in link above):

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/01/27/weekly-climate-and-energy-news-roundup-628/

Here is a link to another full report of Happer’s research:

https://co2coalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/The-Role-of-Greenhouse-Gases-in-Energy-Transfer-in-the-Earths-Atmosphere.pdf

Happer, along with Richard Lindzen and others, ranks among the best of atmospheric physicists and experts on the warming influence of CO2, and concludes from the best of evidence that there is no “climate crisis”.

The quotes below are from Ken Haapala’s “The Week That Was: 2025 01-25, Weekly Climate and Energy New Roundup #629”, a publication of “The Science and Environmental Policy Project”, published on Wattsupwiththat.com.

I will intersperse more quotes from the original article by Happer to the ones Haapala used in his comments below.

Haapala opens this episode of This Week commenting on “a 2021 presentation by AMO physicist William Happer who presents our understanding of the greenhouse effect and its role in climate.”

Haapala says, “What Physical Evidence? Atomic, Molecular, and Optical (AMO) physicist William Happer has a strong, lengthy post in WUWT that goes to the central issue of understanding the greenhouse effect and why greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, are not causing dangerous warming. In it Happer discusses the frenzy over climate and concludes the paragraph with:

He quotes Happer, “Those who think that way, in many cases, mean very well. But they have been misled. As a scientist who actually knows a lot about climate (and I set up many of our climate research centers when I was at the Department of Energy in the early 1990s) I can assure you that there is no climate emergency. There will not be a climate emergency.…

“Crusades have always ended badly… They have brought hardship and death to multitudes… Policies to address this phony climate emergency will cause great damage to American citizens and to their environment.”

Happer then says more about what motivates some people to zealotry in the climate alarmism crusade, “This is really not a question of science. This is a question of a secular religion for some.”

Happer illustrates that the press is deceitful when it uses photos from polluted Asian cities as examples of greenhouse gas pollution. He responds, “CO2… is not a pollutant at all.”

Insert to add to Happer’s explanations below: Scientist Javier Vinos posts his reports (“The Sun Climate Effect: The Winter Gatekeeper Hypothesis”) at “co2coalition.org” and “Wattsupwiththat.com”. He details the atmospheric processes that convect heat from the tropics to the poles to then radiate back out to space through the clearer polar atmospheres.

Continuing with Haapala’s comments on Happer’s research and my further insertions of quotes from Happer…

“The Earth is most intensely heated in the tropics… There is more solar energy coming in at the tropics than goes out as cooling radiation to space. The excess heat must be convected to polar regions by warm air and ocean water…

“Earth maintains its temperature by balancing the solar heating during the day with the thermal cooling to cold space, both during the day and night. Climate involves a complicated interplay of the sunlight that warms us, and the thermal infra-radiation that escapes to space. Heat is transported from the tropics to the poles by the motion of warm air and ocean water…”

“Happer explains the atmospheric circulation that transports heat from the equator to the poles. Ocean circulations also do the same. It is important to realize that this convection is far more important in transferring heat from the surface to the lower atmosphere than radiation. Radiation and greenhouse gas delaying radiation to space does not become important until about 10 km or so (33,000 feet) in mid-latitudes. [Higher elevation in the tropics and lower in the polar regions. At these altitudes, there is little water vapor remaining.]”

Haapala then inserts this further important explanation with regard to what Happer is stating:

“[TWTW comment: That Earth’s primary method of transporting heat from the surface to the middle atmosphere is convection illustrates the folly of the IPCC and its collaborators using surface-air temperatures. These are measured by instruments a few feet above the surface yet are used to claim that increasing temperatures are caused by increasing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The greenhouse effect occurs in the atmosphere, particularly above the mid-latitudes, not a few feet above the surface.]”

Happer’s actual comments on this: “(The solar heat on the Earth’s surface) is eventually released by radiation into space… But for the first few kilometers of altitude, a good fraction of that heat is not carried by radiation, but by convection of warm, moist air. CO2 has no direct effect on convection near the surface. But once you get up to 10 kilometers or so, most of the heat if transported by radiation.”

My insert here on these facts: I have repeatedly stated on this site, along with others making the same point, that arguing over energy policies and pushing for the delay in full decarbonization, from the alarmist’s date of 2030 to a more reasonable 2050, is useless if you then spin on your heel and admit to the alarmist’s claim that yes, we must do something about the “climate crisis”. If you don’t confront the basic science of climate, then you lose the entire argument/debate.

Nothing is more absolutely critical to the climate science debate than the warming influence of CO2 and the fact that influence is now “saturated”, a physics term meaning that adding more CO2 to the atmosphere will contribute very little, if anything, to any possible future warming. Research shows we may actually be heading into a future cooling period. Javier Vinos suggests we won’t know which way climate will go till the 2030s.

Continuing with Haapala’s comments on Happer

“Happer then goes through what is known about the influence of greenhouse gases blocking, delaying, the transfer of radiant energy through the atmosphere. Except for clouds, atmospheric gases block little radiation in the visible wavelengths, but block radiation in the infrared wavelengths, which are not visible to humans. By far, water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas. Carbon dioxide is secondary and decidedly minor. Happer illustrates that each primary greenhouse gas prevents certain wavelengths from freely escaping to space.”

Happer adds that the gases that block the radiation of heat back out to space are called “greenhouse gases”

He further quotes Happer, ”This keeps Earth’s surface temperature warmer than it would be (by about 20 or 30 degrees). [C or about 35 to 55°F] The Earth would be an ice cube if it were not for water vapor and CO2; and when I say water vapor, you should understand that I really mean water vapor and clouds, the condensed form of water. Clouds are at least as important as greenhouse gases, and they are very poorly understood to this day.””

Haapala then shares Happer’s more detailed research on the CO2 warming influence…

“Happer discusses that the difference between the Planck curve and the Schwarzschild curve is the greenhouse effect. He then discusses how little the difference is increased if you double CO2 from today’s concentrations. He then states:

““The message I want you to understand, which practically no one really understands, is that doubling CO2 makes almost no difference. Doubling would replace the black curve by the red curve. On the basis of this, we are supposed to give up our liberties. We are supposed to give up the gasoline engines of our automobiles. … Do not let anyone convince you that that is a good bargain. It is a terrible bargain. The doubling (of CO2 levels from today’s 426 ppm) actually does make a little difference. It decreases the radiation to space by about three watts per square meters. In comparison, the total radiation to space is about 300 watts per square meter. So, it is a one percent effect—it is actually a little less than that, because that is with no clouds. Clouds make everything even less threatening.”

Haapala then adds quotes from Happer that explain “greenhouse gas saturation”.

““Saturation is a jargon term that means CO2 has done all the greenhouse warming it can easily do. Doubling CO2 does not make much difference. You could triple or quadruple CO2 concentrations, and it also would make little difference. The CO2 effects are strongly saturated.””

He notes Happer’s comments on the discredited climate model forecasts that “ran too hot”, meaning they predicted warming in the range of 3-6 degrees Centigrade but actual climate warming over the last century has been about 1.2 degree C and that has been beneficial to all life.

Haapala quotes Happer again:

““The alleged harm from CO2 is from warming, and the warming observed is much, much less than predictions. In fact, warming as small as we are observing is almost certainly beneficial. It gives slightly longer growing seasons. You can ripen crops a little bit further north than you could before. So, there is completely good news in terms of the temperature directly. But there is even better news. By standards of geological history, plants have been living in a CO2 famine during our current geological period.””

Happer adds more: “(On the paleoclimate scale) CO2 levels have been five times, ten times, even twenty times greater than today… During all this period (i.e. the Phanerozoic history of life over the past 500 million years), with much higher CO2 levels, life flourished on Earth… it flourished better when there was more CO2. Plants really would prefer to have two, three, four times more CO2 than we have today.”

He then goes into photosynthesis showing that with less CO2 plants need more holes to absorb the scarcer CO2 and those holes also diffuse water out from the plant, drying plants out. But with more CO2 the plants need fewer holes to get their basic food and they do not leak as much water (CO2 combines with water to make sugar for plants). Hence, they suffer less from drought and that helps explain the amazing greening of the Earth over past decades.

He says, “More CO2 actually benefits the world. So, why are we demonizing this beneficial molecule that is making plants grow better… It is not a pollutant at all, and we should have the courage to do nothing about CO2 emissions. Nothing needs to be done.”

Happer’s conclusions: “So, the takeaway message is that policies that slow CO2 emissions are based on flawed computer models which exaggerate warming by factors of two or three, probably more. That is message number one. So, why do we give up our freedoms, why do we give up our automobiles, why do we give up a beefsteak because of this model that does not work?”

Once again, a repeat of his conclusion: “(CO2) is not a pollutant at all, and we should have the courage to do nothing about CO2 emissions. Nothing needs to be done.”

One more

If you want to know why a restorative approach in criminal justice is the better option to protect others from recidivism then watch the documentary on Carl Panzram. Dangerous, repeatedly violent people must be locked up but then treated humanely while incarcerated. Panzram’s story makes this point well.

“Carl Panzram: The Spirit of Hatred and Vengeance”, John DiMaggio

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxhcYl8AGbQ&t=46s

Panzram details the brutally inhumane manner in which he was treated as a child, and continued on through his prison experiences, that then produced the murdering monster that was Panzram.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Milei fights for freedom. Happer fights climate alarmism. I fight the harmful/destructive psychopathologies in religious traditions.

Bob Brinsmead- “Men never do greater evil than when they do it in the name of God.”

Soon coming- More on atmospheric physicist William Happer’s excellent research on the warming influence of CO2. His conclusion from the evidence- “There is no climate crisis.” And our response? “Do nothing.”

And Javier Milei’s refreshingly blunt takedown of destructive ‘Wokeism’ at Davos recently. He presented a defense of freedom that few can match today. Amazingly, the WEF collectivists invited him back after a similar speech last year to tell them to their faces that their bad ideas are destroying Western liberal democracy.

Further, more coming on why Christianity does not represent Historical Jesus, and why Islam is not the “fulfillment” of the actual message and person of Historical Jesus. Yes, Islam does “fulfill” varied features of Jewish Christianity such as the rejection of Jesus as a sacrifice for sin (his redemptive death), the rejection of his virgin birth and divinity, the embrace of Jewish water purification, abstention from alcohol and pork, and so on. And Islam “fulfills” varied elements of Paul’s Christ mythology- i.e. judgment and severe punishment for refusing the message/messenger (i.e. hellfire), and the demand for obedience and submission to God, etc. But these features contradict the actual Jesus of history. Much like Paul’s “Christ-ianity” contradicts the message and person of Jesus.

The point of “Carney barker for a cult” below? Despite clothing himself with “highly experienced international financial expert, highly educated, etc.”, the new wannabe emperor is nakedly a cultic extremist, no different from all religious extremists across history who fell for crusades of primitive apocalyptic hysteria. As historian Richard Landes stated in his recounting of apocalyptic millennial movements like Marxism, Nazism, and environmental alarmism (“Heaven On Earth”), the leaders have all been just “superstitious members of a salvationist apocalyptic millennial cult”. That applies to all today who embrace “climate alarmism”.

Mark Carney may take a scrap of comfort from the fact that Stephen Hawking also fell for Chicken Little climate alarmism over the last two years of his life. He engaged “end of days” date-setting, initially proclaiming the end in about a 1000 years (2016), then logarithmically dropping to the end in just 100 years from either AI Terminators or climate change (2017). The next year, had he lived and continued his logarithmic pattern, he would have dropped to apocalypse in 10 years. Still just enough time to exit the planet before being humiliated by reality as all apocalyptic prophets are eventually exposed. Because apocalyptic has a 100% historical failure rate. Apocalyptic consistently makes fools of the otherwise brightest people. Look at what it did to Chicken Little. Sheesh, eh.

https://www.businessinsider.com/stephen-hawking-1000-years-2016-11

https://www.wired.com/story/stephen-hawking-100-years-on-earth-prediction-starmus-festival/

Now posted below– Mercy toward opponents/enemies enrages some people. They detest efforts to “normalize” their opponents and vilify those who refuse to join them in demonizing and dehumanizing their opponents. What is this psychopathology of outrage at any mercy, kindness, generous forgiveness and inclusion being shown toward differing others?

It is deeply rooted in history as illustrated by, for example, Historical Jesus omitting the “divine vengeance” element in his reading of Isaiah 61, an omission that incited his fellow Jews with murderous rage. They then tried to try to toss him off a cliff. Moderns today similarly exhibit the same furious outrage at mercy toward opponents/enemies.

See below, Joe Rogan’s interview of Mark Zuckerberg and his pushback against Democratic Party censorship on Facebook.

Also below, CNN’s Fareed Zakaria on leftist Progressivism’s decline in Western societies due to excessive authoritarianism.

“Across the West, arrogant woke leaders like Trudeau are in retreat: The poor quality, high expense, and arrogant bossiness of these governments is finally taking its toll”, J. D. Tuccille, National Post, Jan.10, 2025

And… “The societal shift back to rediscovering common sense”. Also, comment on the hesitancy of the adherents of world religions to recognize that their traditions have borrowed the main ideas of the primitive mythologies and religions that preceded them. That is true of all religions.

Also new below…

Elite finance expert? Or “carny barker” for a cult? Wendell Krossa

Mark Carney is elbowing his way to become Liberal leader and replace Justin Trudeau.

Historian Richard Landes has noted that the Bolsheviks tried to masquerade their movement as “science and modernity”, but they were still just “superstitious members of a salvationist apocalyptic millennial cult”.

See the full comment below on Mark Carney, WEF “soft socialist” and climate alarmist, seeking to bring his WEF-style climate crusade to Canada to reframe the Liberal party with his smoother elitist presentation, and thereby replace, but maintain, the destructive eco-zealotry of Justin Trudeau. Just another eco-cultist presenting as smooth operator. The very gimmick of the original Bolsheviks.

And yes, contemporary “leftist Progressivism” has wedded itself to the climate cult as noted by experts like Richard Lindzen and others.

Intro note: Western civilization has three great religious traditions- i.e. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. All three have been influenced and shaped by the Persian/Zoroastrian religion of some 3,500 years ago, Wendell Krossa

Sample source- https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2007/4/11/321915/-

First, right out of the gate- The Zoroastrian beliefs in cosmic dualism and apocalyptic are the two worst of the “bad religious ideas” that it bequeathed to the West and Western religions. These have been among the most destructive ideas ever conceived. Cosmic dualism (God fighting Satan) has validated endless human tribal dualisms, and wars of tribe against tribe. Apocalyptic (as part of a complex of bad ideas) has incited too many mass-destruction and mass-death outcomes across history.

(Insert note: There are legitimate battles of good against evil- e.g. the Nazi/Allies war. But in all battles, we maintain our humanity and avoid any tribalism deformity by remembering that our “enemies”, even though we must defeat them in war, are still our family and deserve humane treatment post-war.)

My brain raises a bit of a flag of caution about engaging this topic below of bad ideas in religious traditions. It’s a bit unsettling to tackle because so many approach such subjects with the pre-intent to misunderstand, to pull comments out of context and twist meanings, and then to revert to smears and vilification- i.e. “Islamophobia”, etc. But the issues at play are about broader concerns than any “religiophobia” smears can dismiss.

I will wade in because the outcomes have been consistently and incalculably destructive and the root contributing factors still dominate human narratives and minds with dangerously inciting and validating ideals. The warning of Richard Landes, and the military guy, were never more critical that if you don’t deal with these inciting/validating ideas behind destructive movements, then you will only repeat them.

“It’s the commonalities, stupid” (paraphrasing James Carville’s “It’s the economy, stupid”). Wendell Krossa

All of us are facing a common enemy or monster in these monstrous ideas that affirm and validate tribalism, domination of others, and punitive destruction of differing others. I am speaking to the inner battle, the real battle of life, where we face the common monster of all humanity. Our real struggle in life is not against differing others but against our own inherited impulses to tribalism, domination, and punitive, destructive response to the failures of others. Our real battle is with the beliefs/ideas/themes in our narratives, especially in our religious narratives, that validate our worst impulses.

Be aware that the monster hides by covering itself with religious robes, and especially likes to hide behind deity.

Psychologist Harold Ellens exposed this element of reframing the worst of features in terms of the best of divinity (i.e. the hiding trick) and what such monstrous features do to human minds…

“There is in Western culture a psychological archetype, a metaphor that has to do with the image of a violent and wrathful God… this image represents God sufficiently disturbed by the sinfulness of humanity that God had only two options: destroy us or substitute a sacrifice to pay for our sins. He did the latter. He killed Christ.

“… the crucifixion, a hugely violent act of infanticide or child sacrifice, has been disguised by Christian conservative theologians as a ‘remarkable act of grace’. Such a metaphor of an angry God, who cannot forgive unless appeased by a bloody sacrifice, has been ‘right at the center of the Master Story of the Western world for the last 2,000 years. And the unavoidable consequence for the human mind is a strong tendency to use violence’.” (See the full context of Ellen’s comments in Zenon Lotufo’s “Cruel God, Kind God”)

Continuing…

This inner battle relates also the “commonalities” thing that I am pointing to and commenting on further below.

My point and intent below is to emphasize commonalities in terms of our meta-narratives- i.e. that we all make the same mistakes in our narratives, holding the same bad ideas that incite and validate bad impulses. Hence, we all face the same enemies, monsters, the ones inside us. The actual struggle of life (i.e. the real “righteous battle against evil”) is not about us warring against one another over our differences. Those battles sidetrack us from the war that matters most (i.e. Solzhenitsyn’s point that the real battle of good versus evil runs down the center of every human heart). Further, our battles with others tend to blur and bury the fact of fundamental human oneness, the oneness of the human family.

A key point below that qualifies the commonalities in all three Western religions- Islam borrowed from Jewish Christianity, including the most appalling features of threat theology, but did not include the “diamond” teachings of Historical Jesus. Under Christian Ebionite Waraqa’s guidance, Muhammad borrowed the more threatening features of primitive theology, features similar to those of Paul’s Christ myth (i.e. the “wrathful” God of Romans, destroying deity of Revelation 19, etc.). But without the moderating influence of Historical Jesus, the outcomes have not been good for religions like Islam. That is one notable difference between Christianity and Islam, among the many shared common themes of both religions.

Significant commonalities in all the great world religions don’t give anyone the escape clause to argue- “My religion is better than yours”. As for the Jesus material in Christianity, that message presents a potent moderating influence on the religion. But Christianity overall, in emphasizing Paul’s Christ myth, has seriously distorted the Jesus material, “buried it” according to Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy. That is as egregious an offense as anything in any other religion, and that discredits the back-patting that Christians might want to engage when comparing their tradition to other religions.

Important intro note: This site repeatedly employs the “evil triad” of “tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction” as a summarization of the most destructive impulses in people, the worst of our inherited animal impulses. Point? These impulses- the worst of the worst- have been incited and validated across history by bad ideas/ideals in human narratives, notably bad religious ideas.

The incitement and validation rises to its most harmful influence when such features are projected onto deity (i.e. God as favoring true believers, damning unbelievers, God as Lord/King validating relationships of domination/submission, God as retaliatory destroyer through apocalypse/hell). These psychopathologies, projected onto deity, have long held dominant place in defining humanity’s highest ideal and authority. Who’s to blame in that? Religious traditions.

Bad ideas inciting and validating bad human behavior operates through the “behavior based on belief” model that people have used across history. This pattern developed from the primal human impulse for meaning and purpose as related to deity. People, motivated by their impulse to live according to the purpose for which they were created, have long appealed to the divine Model for a pat on the back.

This is what Historical Jesus was referring to when he concluded his summary statement of his message (Luke 6:27-36) with “Be merciful as your Father is merciful”. Be like your Creator. Validate your behavior with an appeal to your understanding of what God is like.

This all goes haywire, and hell is unleashed on societies, when the image of deity is corrupted with inhuman features like tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction of differing others. As Bob Brinsmead has said, “Men never do greater evil than when they do it in the name of God.” And if your God validates the worst in you… well, look out people.

Most of us still feel the tensing of our guts at the nauseating horror of what young Muslim men did in Israel Oct.7, 2023, raping, burning, murdering as they screamed “Allahu Akbar” (“praise/glory to God”). But then stepping back to view the bigger picture, we remember that is exactly what Christians did in Jerusalem roughly a millennium ago as they dismembered Muslim bodies- men, women, and children- till the blood ran ankle-deep, singing hymns and praising God that they could take part in the slaughter of God’s enemies. And that followed the slaughter of Jewish communities as the Crusaders marched across Europe on the way to Israel. And we look at the Jewish Old Testament for those repetitious accounts of early Hebrews slaughtering men, women, and children. All in the name of God. Well, Mircea Eliade recounts that even early Buddhists killed one another in battles over which sect truly represented their founder.

And atheists/materialists- Wipe that smirk off your faces. Look at the bloody crusades your philosophy/ideology has taken part in. 100 million bodies just last century.

The obvious rejoinder here is to make sure that your God (your conception of deity) is fully and authentically humane. This is critical to solving the problem that the military guy pointed to after the 2014 eruption of ISIS violence in Syria- i.e. that if you want to solve eruptions of violence, then go after the ideas that incite and validate such eruptions.

For atheists/materialists, this also applies to the ultimate ideals/authorities that you hold. What features define those ideals? The cold, predatory drives of our primate ancestors as explained through the often too-dogmatic doctrines of evolutionary biology? Like the young rapper who explained the advocacy for violence in his music- “We are, after all, just animals”.

I am repeatedly flabbergasted at hearing young people state their status as “secular, materialist, atheist, etc.”, and then mouthing the themes of- “the past was better (original paradise of a wilderness world), corrupt humans ruined paradise, life is now declining toward something worse, toward apocalyptic ending (e.g. climate apocalypse), we must make a sacrifice for our sins (“de-growth, de-development, decarbonization”- return to the ”morally superior” simple lifestyles of the “noble savages” of the communalism past who were “more connected” to Mother Earth, etc.), and then we must engage a righteous battle against our enemies who threaten life on earth with their embrace of industrial, Classic Liberal civilization, and if we defeat them, then we are promised restored paradise or some new communalism utopia”. Proudly identifying as “secular materialist” but espousing the very same primitive themes of the earliest mythologies and religions from across history. Sheesh, eh.

Ah Joe Campbell, you nailed it, stating that all people across history have believed the same primitive myths, and across all the cultures of the world.

First, some background on the child rape horror in Britian. This relates to my comments in response to the Piers Morgan interview of Jordan Peterson in a link further below:

“Britain’s mass child rape horror and the price of not being called racist: Thanks to Elon Musk, the ‘grooming gangs’ scandal is finally getting the outrage it deserves”, Michael Murphy. Jan.9, 2025

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/michael-murphy-britains-mass-child-rape-horror-and-the-price-of-not-being-called-racist

The story of mass child rapes in Britain by Pakistani Muslim men has provoked outrage and contentious discussion about what is happening. Note this interview of Jordan Peterson by Piers Morgan, Wendell Krossa

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKCB-MhBP7I&t=904s

Some on the Piers Morgan panel argued that Islam has a worse proclivity than Christianity to such horrific behavior. Kind of a tribalism position- We Christians are not as bad as you Muslims. While it is true that over the past few centuries most Christians have moderated the violent behaviors of their past history, Christianity also has a history of really bad behavior and episodes of bloodshed that are unequaled, some argue, by any other religion. I won’t go into the history of the Councils, Crusades, Inquisitions, persecution of heretics and witches, etc.

Other panel members taking the Muslim side, defensively state that Islam is not an inherently violent religion.

Some on the Morgan panel noted that the rape scandal is due more to cultural influences on those Pakistani men, not so much the influences from their religion. That is worth considering in the effort to understand better what happened.

Other larger background points to consider:

Someone once stated that the Christian bible has some 600-plus passages where God advocates or approves the use of violence against others, including Moses affirming the mass rape of captive women. This link lists over 1000 biblical passages pointing to divine approval or advocacy of violence.

https://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html

The Quran presents the same angry, violent deity as Christianity, with numerous threats from the angry God against unbelievers who will be cast into the fire (Hell) where there is severe eternal torment and from which there is no escape. Such warnings are on almost every page, or other page, of the Quran. That endless repetition gives the sense of an overwhelmingly dominant theme or message being proclaimed, and not just a peripheral “metaphor”.

(Note- A trend in the theology of all major religious traditions is to dismiss the harsher features in their belief systems as just “metaphor”. But, as one Muslim writer noted, that does not alter the “content” of what is being communicated.)

https://www.quora.com/Since-the-Koran-has-roughly-109-verses-that-calls-for-violence-against-unbelievers-how-is-it-that-Muslims-say-that-it-is-a-religion-of-peace

The deities of all three religious traditions share the same primitive features of tribalism (true believers saved, unbelievers damned), domination (submission to the deity and to authorities appointed by the deity), and then the punitive destruction of enemies. This applies also to the third of the great Western religious traditions- Judaism.

All three religions share the same fundamental religious themes that incite and validate bad behavior in members. Defenders of all three traditions must take responsibility for those ideas in their belief systems and for the damage that has been done over past history, damage incited, guided, and validated by those very ideas. This site repeatedly posts the evidence from historians of such damage (i.e. Richard Landes on the Christian ideas that drove Marxism, Nazism, and are now driving environmental alarmism, along with the research of Arthur Herman, Arthur Mendel, David Redles, and others.)

The defensive denial response of true believers in these religions is that- “Our religion is a religion of peace”. And yes, most members of all three traditions have learned to moderate their behavior to become less tribal, less dominating, less violent toward unbelievers. All such moderation is to be sincerely praised.

I would attribute this ‘contemporary era’ moderation more to the influence of the common human spirit in all humanity, the modern increase in human sensitivity to past barbarity, and the emergence, development, and promotion of common human rights in the modern era, etc. This moderation has occurred despite the ongoing influence of bad religious ideas in all three traditions. Stephen Pinker, in his “Better Angels of Our Nature”, comments on how the moderation of religion occurred in the modern era as religious believers experienced revulsion at the past violent history of their traditions.

But the ideas that incite and validate the worst of human impulses are still there in the belief systems, maintaining their potential to again incite and validate some members to bad behavior, as in the past. Those particular ideas in the mix, the ones that hold the most potential to incite bad behavior, need to be cleaned out entirely because of the risk of people seeking inspiration/validation from their religious beliefs, especially validation from the nature of the God at the core of religion, the ultimate ideal and authority of humanity.

Extremist violence associated with all three religions is not due to some aberrational misinterpretation of fringe features of the religious belief systems. It is based on the core beliefs/themes of all three religions. Notably, beliefs/themes that define the deities of the religions.

I would again affirm what the military guy said after the ISIS eruption of violence in Syria in 2014. If you want to prevent future eruptions of such bad behavior, then go after the core ideas in the traditions that incite and validate such violence and other pathology.

What is being advocated here is simply what we have learned to do in all areas of life- i.e. discern between the good and the bad, between the chaff and the wheat, and then toss out the bad stuff. That is what Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy urged when they argued for making a clear distinction between the “diamonds/pearls” of Jesus and the Christ mythology of Paul.

While I applaud all religious reformism, too much of it remains tinkering around the periphery and not getting to the real root of the problem… due to fear of committing “blasphemy, heresy”? Well, then its helpful to recognize the “benefits of blasphemy”.

See for example, “Blasphemy has set us free”, Robert Fulford, National Post, Feb. 18, 2006.

https://robertfulford.com/2006-02-18-blasphemy.html

Also…

https://www.cato.org/policy-report/may/june-2021/terror-tyranny-blasphemy-laws

Back to this Peterson/Morgan conversation over Islam and Christianity…

To hone my point below- Note that the nature/character of the deity is the ultimate ideal and authority of these Western religions. That reality holds the most potential to incite and validate harm if not fully humane (see the statements of Harold Ellens below).

All three Western religions share a common set of ideas/beliefs that have descended down from the Persian Zoroaster and his religion. Zoroaster has been recognized for assembling the previously scattered themes of primitive mythologies into a formal religion.

Hence, all three Western religions share the same basic views on the nature and character of deity, all embracing the same basic themes that have been passed down from Zoroaster to Judaism to Christianity and then to Islam.

https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20170406-this-obscure-religion-shaped-the-west

Some commentators focus on the cosmic dualism myth as the main influence on the West. The Zoroastrian myth of cosmic dualism states that there is a great battle between good and evil, with the obligation of people to join the true religion in opposition to false religions, to side with the true God against “satanic” other deities and their religions.

True believers are obligated to convert or dominate unbelievers, and also to embrace the punitive destruction of unbelievers to their particular religion, whether by temporal destruction or belief in eternal destruction.

Other scholars state that the theme of Zoroastrian apocalypse by fire was also a notable influence in shaping Western religious thought.

https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803133541558

https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv1b9f5v8

Joseph Azzi, and others, offer some stunning information on the influence of Jewish Christianity (i.e. Ebionism) on Islam- “The Priest and Prophet: The Christian Priest, Waraqa Ibn Nawfal’s, Profound Influence Upon Muhammad, The Prophet of Islam”.

Background:

Ebionism was an early Jewish-Christian sect, similar to the Nazarenes, that emerged within the Jewish movement between 30-80 CE. Ebionites were known as the “poor ones” who zealously followed the Jewish law (Torah). They opposed the priests in Jerusalem and the sacrifice industry, as Jesus did. They rejected the doctrine of the virgin birth of Jesus and the divinity of Jesus (i.e. rejecting Christian Trinity myths), viewing Jesus as a great teacher/prophet, but only human.

A source on this:

https://jamestabor.com/ebionites-nazarenes-tracking-the-original-followers-of-jesus/

The Ebionites were eventually persecuted by Paul’s branch of Christianity as a heretical movement and consequently their sect was scattered abroad, with some Ebionites migrating to the Arabian Peninsula and Mecca, where centuries later their Ebionite religion had a significant influence on Muhammad and his authorship of the Quran.

(Historians note that there is much diversity within all the early sects of Jewish Christianity, including within Ebionism.)

The influence of Jewish Christianity on Muhammad was mediated through the ministry of the Ebionite priest Waraqa. Islamic theologians/scholars suggest, defensively, that the influence of Waraqa was more of post-validation of Muhammad’s visions and insights. However, the evidence suggests that Waraqa’s influence was more of preceding and shaping Muhammad’s thought and writing.

Quotes from Joseph Azzi’s book:

“Waraqa… was an Ebionite Christian priest who lived in Mecca at the same time as Muhammad … and was related to Muhammad by marriage… he was the cousin of Muhammad’s first wife Khadija… Muhammad learned Jewish Christianity from Waraqa before he had his first revelations…”

While some Islamic theologians/scholars reject the influence of Waraqa on Muhammad, Azzi urges, “The preeminent contributions of Waraqa should not be rejected… the spiritual impact he had on the future Arab Prophet” was significant.

Azzi notes the development of the Ebionite religion of Waraqa and the fact that Waraqa translated the Gospel of the Hebrews into Arabic. That gospel is an earlier version of the Gospel of Matthew.

Azzi says that the Quran recognizes the Gospel to the Hebrews- “There is widespread agreement between it and the Quran in matters such as duties, prayers and resurrection… the Quran recalls parables similar to those found in the Ebionite Gospel” (p.12).

Azzi then details the increasing involvement of Waraqa with Muhammad and his visions. Waraqa provides theological and spiritual insights to Muhammad from the gospels that he had translated, notably the gospel of the Hebrews and Matthew. Azzi adds the detail that after Waraqa died, Muhammad’s visions ceased.

“Waraqa and Khadijah cooperate together to prepare Muhammad for his mission. This requires a continuous tutelage with a particular spiritual emphasis”, p.21.

Further on the influence of the gospels of the Hebrews and Matthew on Muhammad, “During the forty-four years when Muhammad and Waraqa are closely involved with each other, the book that the priest is translating from Hebrew to Arabic is faithfully studied” p.23.

He adds, “The Hebrew Gospel… will play a significant role in the transfer of… orthodox doctrines into Muslim beliefs and practices” p.43.

Azzi continues, noting that Muhammad admits that another messenger and book informed him about the “right way” and affirms “that the Quran is really an authentication of the Hebrew book”, p.47. Azzi then quotes specific verses from the Quran that state this.

The shared themes of Jewish Christianity and Islam include a strong monotheism, a rejection of the divinity of Jesus, a rejection of his redemptive death on the cross and resurrection, obedience and submission to the deity, and severe threats of hellfire for infidels. Muhammad also embraced Jewish practices such as circumcision (p.92), water purification rituals, and prohibitions on alcohol and pork.

Add to this the Islamic embrace of apocalyptic mythology and other eschatological beliefs such as an end-time judgment followed by severe punishment.

Azzi concludes, “The teachings of Waraqa… are thoroughly embedded in the Quran…”

The author of one article (i.e. “Waraqa’s Influence on Muhammad”) says that Muslims play down Waraqa’s influence because it undermines their preferred belief “that Muhammad had been taught the Quran by Allah”. But the similarities with Ebionite Christianity and its Gospel to the Hebrews are undeniable, hence, “we have a paradox of world-historical proportions… the fact that Jewish Christianity indeed disappeared within the Christian church but was preserved in Islam”.

https://counteringislamism.wordpress.com/waraka/

Moving back to Azzi again, “Waraqa’s… ministry includes his selection of… Muhammad to be his successor as the head of the (Ebionite) church, an offshoot of a Jewish-Christian sect…”, p. 135.

Some further evidence of Muhammad borrowing from Waraqa’s gospel to the Hebrews or Matthew:

“The Quran itself declares that much of its ethical standards were built on previous scriptural systems…” p.107.

Then Azzi notes the varied parables in the Quran that were borrowed from Matthew, such as the Sower and the Seeds, the parable of the Rich man and the beggar Lazarus, the parable of the wise man who builds his house on solid rock, the parable of the fruitful tree and the unfruitful tree, the parable of the mustard seed, the parable of the faithful servant and the evil servant, and the parable of the ten bridesmaids, p.107-111.

“The Quran does not hesitate to recognize that it has borrowed heavily from the earlier scriptures”.

This presents a problem for Islamic believers, to recognize that their scriptures are borrowed from previous religious systems and are not as “divinely inspired” as they have been taught. Christians face the same sobering realization that their scriptures and beliefs are descended from the primitive mythologies of ancient people. All subsequent religious traditions reshape details in what they borrow but the essential content and themes of borrowed material remains the same.

Joseph Campbell summarized this descent of narrative themes across history in stating that people have believed the same primitive myths all across history and across all the cultures of the world. Myths of original paradise, early human sin that ruins paradise, great flood myths, life being cursed and becoming worse, eventually declining toward collapse and apocalyptic ending as punishment for human sin, demand for sacrifice/payment, suffering as redemptive, demand to engage a righteous battle against evil enemies, and the promise of restored paradise for true believers.

Moving along, Wendell Krossa

I would add this to Azzi’s points that the Quran borrowed from the Gospel to the Hebrews or Matthew’s Gospel. Note that the Quran makes this distinctly similar and obviously borrowed point from Matthew’s gospel- i.e. people rejecting the messenger and message, are condemned for rejecting the God being presented, and therefore are damned to hell.

In Matthew 11 Jesus rails against the villages that rejected his miracles (i.e. rejected the messenger and his message):

“Jesus began to denounce the towns in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. ‘Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida!… it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you…. You will go down to Hell (“cast into outer darkness… cast into the blazing furnace… where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth”)’”.

Then, affirming Azzi’s evidence of the Quran borrowing from the gospel to the Hebrews (Matthew’s gospel), the Quran repeatedly states that those who reject the prophet and his message, those who do not believe the message and the messenger, those who do not believe the Islamic God, are damned to hell.

The verses stating this in the Quran are too numerous and constant to list. But they are the very same statements as made in the gospels to the Hebrews and Matthew. An endless series of threats of the worst punishment imaginable- i.e. hellfire for refusing to believe the messenger, message, and God that is presented to them.

And yes, mixed among the threats in the Quran are scattered statements on divine mercy, kindness, etc. So also in the other Western religions- scattered “diamonds among d___”, to use Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy’s colorful language.

Also note that the Quran does not have the moderating influence of the “Q Wisdom Sayings” of Jesus that many Christians have learned to focus on, while they ignore the nastier stuff in their holy book. Many moderate Christians have learned to downplay the darker material in their scriptures, material that contradicts the central themes and message of Historical Jesus.

In all his borrowings from Jewish Christianity, the biggest blunder of Muhammad was to not include the powerful moderating influence of the actual message of Jesus. But Paul’s blunder was, arguably, far worse. Paul took the Palestinian wisdom sage Jesus who had protested the sacrifice industry, and died for that protest, and turned his protest against sacrifice into the Christ myth of a godman who came as the supreme sacrifice for all sin. A distortion and fraud of such scale/degree that it is hard to comprehend how it has survived to this day as truth in the minds of billions of people.

Bob Brinsmead on the anti-sacrifice message and ministry of Historical Jesus:

https://bobbrinsmead.com/the-historical-jesus-what-the-scholars-are-saying/

The guiding ideals/principles of Historical Jesus (i.e. his central teaching that, even while almost buried in the larger New Testament context, has continued to exert a potent moderating influence against the worst beliefs and impulses of the Christian tradition.):

Dominant themes in the message of Jesus :

“Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you. If you love only those who love you, what credit is that to you? Everyone finds it easy to love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Everyone can do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Most will lend to others, expecting to be repaid in full.

“But do something more heroic, more humane. (Live on a higher plane of human experience). Do not retaliate against your offenders/enemies with ‘eye for eye’ justice. Instead, love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then you will be just like God because God does not retaliate against God’s enemies. God does not mete out eye for eye justice. Instead, God is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked. God causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. Be unconditionally loving, just as your God is unconditionally loving”. (My paraphrase of Luke 6:32-36 or Matthew 5:38-48.)

This can be summarized in this single statement: “Love your enemy because God does”.

(Note: The moderating or humanizing influence of the above Jesus message is evident in the very content- i.e. what is said.)

Example of non-retaliatory, unconditional love: The Prodigal Father story in Luke 15:11-31.

The Father (representing God) did not demand a sacrifice, restitution, payment, apology, punishment, or anything else before forgiving, fully accepting, and loving the wasteful son.

The above statement and illustration by Jesus, overturns the highly conditional Christian religion and Paul’s Christ mythology. Paul, along with the rest of the New Testament, preached a retaliatory God who demanded full payment and punishment of all sin in a blood sacrifice of atonement before he would forgive, accept, and ultimately love anyone.

Weaving back to my larger point of these three Western religions…

The evidence from across history, on all three religions, affirms Harold Ellen’s point that the very same “cruel God” mythology in all three religions deforms human personality with fear, anxiety, shame guilt, despair and depression, nihilism, and violence (see “Cruel God, Kind God” by Zenon Lotufo).

Lotufo quoting Ellens:

“There is in Western culture a psychological archetype, a metaphor that has to do with the image of a violent and wrathful God… this image represents God sufficiently disturbed by the sinfulness of humanity that God had only two options: destroy us or substitute a sacrifice to pay for our sins. He did the latter. He killed Christ.

“Ellens goes on by stating that the crucifixion, a hugely violent act of infanticide or child sacrifice, has been disguised by Christian conservative theologians as a ‘remarkable act of grace’. Such a metaphor of an angry God, who cannot forgive unless appeased by a bloody sacrifice, has been ‘right at the center of the Master Story of the Western world for the last 2,000 years. And the unavoidable consequence for the human mind is a strong tendency to use violence’.

“’With that kind of metaphor at our center, and associated with the essential behavior of God, how could we possibly hold, in the deep structure of our unconscious motivations, any other notion of ultimate solutions to ultimate questions or crises than violence- human solutions that are equivalent to God’s kind of violence’…

“Hence, in our culture we have a powerful element that impels us to violence, a Cruel God Image… that also contributes to guilt, shame, and the impoverishment of personality…”.

As Harold Ellens says, “If your God uses force, then so may you, to get your way against your ‘enemies’”.

As Bob Brinsmead says, “We become just like the God that we believe in”.

Further, Jordan Peterson in his defense of Christianity as better than Islam, argues that Islam was spread by the sword. Well, balance that with the evidence that Christianity was also spread by the sword under Constantine, and in places like Latin America.

https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/interview-converting-by-the-sword

https://brooklynrail.org/2008/04/express/the-church-and-its-sins-constantines-sword/

http://www.belovedspear.org/2014/03/constantines-sword.html

All three Western religions are more similar on fundamental and dominant themes/beliefs than they are different in other areas. This raises the question of why there is such enmity and hatred between members of these religions when they share basic common beliefs?

Notably, they all share the same “core problem”, their inheritance of Zoroaster’s cosmic dualism that validates the human tribalism of a good religion set in obligatory conflict with evil enemies who differ (among the many other tribal dualisms that people construct to separate themselves from differing others in relationships of enmity, hatred, and outright war- i.e. dualisms based on race/ethnicity, nationality, ideology, etc.).

Add the Western religious theologies of the divine ideal of domination/submission relating, and justice as punitive destruction, both temporal and eternal. These core ideals/beliefs shape the very nature of the deity of Western religions, deity as the long-standing ultimate ideal and authority of humanity.

It’s not about a competition for which religion is “better or worse”. All three share the same heritage of bad ideas and all fail by embracing and promoting the same theology of a violent, vengeful God as the cohering center of their complexes of primitive myths. And all have histories of true believers finding validation for bad behavior based on the nature of their deity (using the “behavior validated by belief” relationship).

All three religions have major flaws, so stop the comparative arguments and the defense and blaming the other as worse, when all three share the same common fundamental beliefs. I am reminded here also of Dominic Crossan’s point (Jesus Seminar) that it is unethical to state that another person’s belief is “demonic” in contrast with your belief in the very same thing. He was referring to early Christians claiming that the Roman belief in virgin birth was demonic (i.e. Emperors/Caesars born of virgins) compared to the Christian belief in the very same thing.

Adherents of all three Western religions need to engage the Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy approach of discerning the “diamonds from the dung” in the mix of their beliefs and practices, harsh as that lands on true believer ears. That is the fundamental responsibility of everyone of us- i.e. to discern bad from good in all areas of life.

The project of distinguishing good from bad requires that true believers cease the blind denial of bad elements in the mix of their belief systems and cease defending their entire traditions without exercising responsible re-evaluation of the nasty features in the mix. Recognize what is valuable in your tradition, what affirms authentic humaneness, but then also acknowledge what in your belief system incites and validates the worst of human impulses to tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction of differing others.

And most critical to any thorough reformism project- Go to the core of belief systems, the “cohering center” that is the ultimate ideal and authority of deity. We all become just like the God that we believe in. If our God is tribal then so also we will become tribal in our thinking, feeling, motivations, and behavior. And if our God dominates others as iconic “Lord/King” then so we will find validation for the same domination of others. And if our God solves problems with punitive violence then so may we resort to the same inhumane treatment of failing others.

The same prominent themes frame the narratives in the holy books of all three Western religions.

Where to next, then?

Go directly to the “Mother of all roots of a problem, the most influential of contributing root factors.” Replace the core of religious theology- i.e. God theory- with the central Jesus insight on God as universal, unconditional love. His “stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God”. A theology that rejected Zoroastrian cosmic dualism and tribal opposition between differing groups of people, meaning the rejection of favoring and only including true believers while excluding unbelievers. A God defined by the “greatness of serving others, not lording over others”. A God who did not engage the punitive destruction of “eye for eye” retaliatory justice as in apocalypse and hell myths.

Then end the struggle for your religion to dominate in society over others that you believe fundamentally differ in adverse/detrimental ways, but actually do not differ in terms of basic beliefs and practices.

Then take the “diamond features” out of religious systems (out of the deforming influence of religious context) and frame them as common features of the human spirit- i.e. the diamonds of common forgiveness, mercy, kindness, love, generosity, and other common human features that are practiced by religious people and atheists alike. The common goodness of the common human spirit.

Or if you choose to remain in a religious tradition, understand that what is good in your system is not due to some mysterious influence from your religion. It is due to the human spirit that exhibits goodness in all sorts of contexts, despite surrounding influences that may undermine or deform the common impulse to good.

Now to the most critical reform of all

The central breakthrough insight of Historical Jesus, that God was an unconditional reality, is entirely contrary to the conditional beliefs and practices of religious traditions. Or to phrase it negatively as James Robinson did- “Jesus’ stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God… His greatest contribution to the history of human ideas”. I use “unconditional” which is a more encompassing term and includes the feature of “non-retaliatory”.

No conditional religion ever has, or can ever, communicate that liberating unconditional deity to humanity. Unconditional deity is contrary to any and all conditional religion. I don’t know how to state that any more clearly.

The no conditions love of God, as the ultimate human ideal, will remove the central validation used by people across history for bad behavior. God as no conditions love will leave people on their own if they choose to act badly in terms of exhibiting tribalism, domination, or punitive destruction of others. There is no such God of tribalism, domination, or punitive destruction. There never has been any such reality. It was always the construction of similarly structured primitive minds seeking to dominate and control their fellow tribe members with myths of such monstrous deities.

Unconditional deity will also spell the collapse of religious traditions as institutions mediating religious conditions to humanity through controlling religious authorities. Unconditional means “Absolutely no conditions. None”.

Add here, to further combat the human versions of tribalism that find validation in Zoroastrian cosmic dualism, the understanding of fundamental human oneness that is backed by the “Mitochondrial Eve” theory of human origins (i.e. all humans on Earth today are the descendants of a common African mother). Buttress this with quantum entanglement that affirms the fundamental oneness of all reality. And the insights of all-encompassing oneness as revealed in the Near-Death Experiences. In light of these insights, see through or past the divisiveness that religious traditions have long promoted among people.

The unconditional love taught by Historical Jesus is best expressed via Classic Liberalism with its protection of the rights and freedoms of all individual, equally. Rights as enumerated in the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, rights as stated in constitutions such as the US Constitution, rights and freedoms as protected by common law systems, and rights and freedoms as protected and promoted by representative institutions staffed with people who truly understand their agencies exist to serve citizens.

And so much more.

The Jesus message is a call to die to the old, and find rebirth in the new, much like the shaman’s experience of complete disintegration and then reintegration around something radically new (my paraphrase of that experience). I would frame the elements of rebirth and re-integration as taking place around insights like the stunning new theology of Jesus. It is a call to embrace a new life of truly human existence framed by the ideal of no conditions love for all. Something like the generosity of spirit and universalism that Nelson Mandela wrestled with and exhibited as a great example for us to follow.

And the Jesus insights function well in any human situation, because they are not religious insights and practices. He was not a religious man and did not intend to start another religion. That adds to the offensive deformity of the man in a world religion.

On the common Muslim hesitancy to recognize the actual origins of Islam in Jewish Christianity. The same hesitancy is felt among Christians, Wendell Krossa

As Christians (myself “former”, I left in late 70s) we were told that our beliefs/ideas came directly from God. They were given to special people (i.e. Paul’s heavenly visions) through divine inspiration with no mistakes. The biblical scriptures, written by the varied specially inspired people (i.e. gospel authors and others), was the authoritative “word of God” to be received, submitted to, and obeyed under threat of eternal damnation. You were never to doubt or question the holy book of our religion as that was sin of the highest order, and “deception by the devil” to boot.

It can be initially disconcerting, but later liberating, to discover that the beliefs that you had embraced are the very same as the beliefs of primitive peoples long before your religion embraced them. The beliefs of all our main world religions are adopted and adapted from the mythologies and religions of primitive people long before our religions were constructed by our founders. Our religions borrowed the same ideas created by others long before, adjusting bits here and there but keeping the main themes intact.

Hence, as Joseph Campbell has said, all people across history have believed the same primitive myths and across all the cultures of the world. Myths of creation, fall, original sin, flood, decline of life toward ending in apocalypse, demand for sacrifice/payment, demand for purging of evil in war of good against evil threat, promise of future paradise. (Sources- Books by Joseph Campbell, Mircea Eliade, and many others on ancient mythologies.)

And note that in Christianity we have the “Christ-ianity” of Paul, not the true “Jesus-ianity” of the “Q Wisdom Sayings” gospel that is the closest that we get to what Jesus actually taught.

Within Christianity and its bible, there is a profound and irreconcilable contradiction between the message of Jesus and the religion of Paul. Christianity has merged two entirely opposite messages thus creating the epitome of an oxymoronic combination of things, that has resulted in cognitive dissonance unheard of anywhere before in history.

Here again is my complex of basic themes that have influenced all the great religions and still dominate both religious and secular systems of belief, Wendell Krossa

“The apocalyptic millennial complex is better understood when fleshed out as the larger complex of primitive myths that includes-

“(1) The baseline myth of a lost original paradise- i.e. a better past that “corrupt, evil humans” have ruined. That undergirds the sense of the loss of something good and, hence, now unbalanced justice demands that that the lost good must be restored in order to rebalance justice and righteousness in the cosmos and life. To make things right again.

“Consequent to the myth of a better past that has been ruined, primitive mythology pivoted to (2) blame people, to blame humanity as the evil enemy that must be punished and even exterminated in order to restore the lost paradise and to save life. In contemporary terms- today the evil enemy of nature is greedy, consuming humans in industrial civilization (“humanity as ‘virus, cancer’ on the Earth”). And even more specifically today, greedy humans using natural resources like fossil fuels that enables them to enjoy the good life.

“Then to further re-enforce the narrative that evil humans had ruined divine and pure nature (i.e. Earth as goddess), the ancients added the ongoing threat that (3) life was declining toward apocalyptic ending. And to even further re-enforce alarm, apocalyptic prophets repeatedly set “always imminent” dates to raise hysteria levels and validate the use of desperate measures (elites using state coercion) to “save” the world that is always threatened by the looming apocalypse.

“But also, the apocalyptic alarmists introduced “hope” into the mix, the perverse version of hope that was built on the violent destruction of enemies. And they create salvation schemes where specially enlightened elites lecture the ignorant and unenlightened commoners on what they must do to be saved from imminent destruction and death- i.e. (4) demand some sacrifice/payment. Today’s sacrifice- “de-growth, de-development”, as a return to primitivism as in a return to the more pure and strong existence of “noble savage” life as hunter-gathers with no ecological footprint. Add to this sacrifice/payment element, the redistribution programs pushed in the endless annual climate COPs.

“Couch this madness in a deformed version of the hero’s quest where those identifying as true heroes will engage a righteous tribal battle to conquer and (5) violently purge a purported monster/enemy framed as demonized fellow humans.

“And when the enemy is fully purged/exterminated, then (6) salvation is attained in a renewed communal paradise.

“Most critical to understand in this set of primitive themes is- What is the driving Force behind this complex? What is the “cohering center” of this complex that has wreaked so much destruction across history? What validates the rest of the primitive and distorting ideas in the complex?

“The cohering center is none other than the “wrathful” deity of all primitive mythologies, the deity royally pissed at humans for ruining his original perfect paradise. Hence, the subsequent threats of divine retaliation toward humanity by violently destroying the entire world in an apocalypse. The mother of all hissy fits. Followed by divine demands for sacrifice/payment/suffering as required conditions to achieve redemption.

“The cohering center of the apocalyptic millennial complex of myths is the violent, destroying God who threatens people in this life through natural disasters, disease, accidents, and predatory cruelty, and also threatens people with after-life harm that adds sting to death. That “monster God” is the central issue to deal with in apocalyptic millennial complexes of myths. This psycho-pathological vision of deity has dominated mythologies and religions across history and has now been transformed into secular/ideological systems of belief to also dominate those. I.e. “Vengeful Gaia, punitive Universe, angry Planet/Mother Earth, payback karma”, etc.

“These deeply embedded themes, long entrenched in human psyches as subconscious archetypes, help explain why emotional satisfaction, not rational evidence is behind our choice in beliefs. Hence, many people simply respond to contemporary apocalyptic millennial narratives, whether Marxist collectivism or climate apocalyptic, because they feel right, good, just, and true. They resonate with deeply embedded archetypes.”

Excellent analysis of our societies and what went wrong….

Leftist elites, desperate to hold onto their power and policies even as they destroy Western societies, are framing the current populist pushback against their authoritarian domination as “far right, extremist right, etc.”. No, it is populist common sense revolting against totalitarianism lunacy. It is “Populism is democracy” as framed by Winston Marshall.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/j-d-tuccille-across-the-west-arrogant-woke-leaders-like-trudeau-are-in-retreat

“Across the West, arrogant woke leaders like Trudeau are in retreat: The poor quality, high expense, and arrogant bossiness of these governments is finally taking its toll”, J. D. Tuccille, National Post, Jan.10, 2025

Tuccille starts commenting that “CNN’s Fareed Zakaria noted over the weekend that progressive politicians are in retreat throughout the West.” Zakaria adds that in the recent US election, Americans repudiated the “arrogance and authoritarianism of the left”.

Zakaria continues that, “The crisis of democratic government then, is actually a crisis of progressive government. People seem to feel that they have been taxed, regulated, bossed around and intimidated by left-of-center politicians for decades — but the results are bad and have been getting worse.”

The results are evident in the high tax burdens of Progressive states with worse outcomes than non-Progressive states. Tuccille notes that Zakaria emphasizes that “the arrogant bossiness of the left also alienates voters.”

Then Tuccille comments on “Jonathan Chait, a center-left writer who has been critical of cancel culture, censorship, and the general intolerance of the left” who predicts that the illiberal authoritarianism of the left is now ending with strong pushback from citizenry.

Tuccille moves on to also credit the Covid pandemic for helping to end leftist authoritarianism because it was in mostly leftist Progressive areas of the Western world where the lockdowns were most strict and elite recriminations against dissent were most severe.

Under Covid “the political left enhanced its political power through “authoritarian means: censorship, repression, and public shaming… the left — intruded into people’s lives with lockdowns and censored dissenting views in the name of suppressing “disinformation”, (Muriel Blaive).

The populist pushback against this leftist authoritarianism will be felt next in Canada, says Tuccille, where Trudeau is on his way out: “Trudeau may think of himself as a liberal, and that might even be the name of his party, but his government actually epitomizes illiberal progressivism,” (Bari Weiss of The Free Press).

The leftist regimes in Western democracies have ignored constitutional limits and denied citizens their basic rights. That has rendered democracy and liberty “an empty shell”.

Tuccille rightly concludes that it is critical that new governments restore respect for personal liberty and restrain state power.

I would add that the restoration and promotion of Classic Liberalism will do that, by protecting the freedoms and rights of all individuals, equally, through Classic Liberal principles, systems of common law, and truly representative state institutions that actually function to serve the people.

And this… As RFK has said, the party that once stood for freedom of speech is now the party of censorship.

“Zuckerberg tells Rogan that the Biden Admin would ‘scream’ and ‘curse’ at this employees, demanding censorship: Zuckerberg joked that the consequences of the political establishment pushing for censorship is that they ‘lost the election’”, Alexander Hall, Fox News, Jan. 10, 2025.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/zuckerberg-tells-rogan-biden-admin-would-scream-curse-his-employees-demanding-censorship

This from Hall, “Meta CEO founder Mark Zuckerberg told podcaster Joe Rogan that members of President Biden’s administration yelled at his employees, demanding they take down content on their behalf.

“Meta announced Tuesday that it would be ending its controversial fact-checking practices and lifting restrictions on speech to “restore free expression” across Facebook, Instagram and Meta platforms, admitting its current content moderation practices have “gone too far.” Zuckerberg spoke about the platform’s struggles to maintain freedom of expression while fending off pressure from the Biden administration amid the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Hall continues, quoting Zuckerberg as saying, “During the Biden administration, when they were trying to roll out the vaccine program,” the social media CEO said, “while they were trying to push that program they also tried to censor anyone who is basically arguing against it. And they pushed us super hard to take down things that were honestly, were true.”…

He adds, “”Who is ‘they’?” Rogan asked. “Who was telling you to take down things that talk about vaccine side effects?”
“”It was people in the Biden administration,” the Meta CEO said.”

Hall says further, “He then spoke further about the “government censorship,” with Zuckerberg saying, “I mean basically these people from the Biden administration would call up our team and like scream at them and curse, and it’s like… these documents are, it’s all kind of out there.”…

Hall ends, concluding: “Podcaster Joe Rogan asked Zuckerberg whether there have been any repercussions to those who demanded censorship of Americans. Zuckerberg joked that those who did lost the 2024 presidential election.”

Joe Rogan episode 2255 on YouTube or Spotify, interview of Mark Zuckerberg

In the first couple of minutes Mark Zuckerberg explains that the censorship movement began about 10 years ago when Trump was elected, and Brexit happened. And then Covid occurred and that is when “content moderation”, that had formerly dealt with actual harmful content (i.e. online bullying), then became more “ideologically driven”.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7k1ehaE0bdU

Zuckerberg admits that he gave too much deference to people in the media saying that Trump could not have gotten elected without help from the Russians. He initially viewed the media and others as acting in good faith. But it bothered him to be in the position of “decider of truth in the world”. They, at Facebook, had put in place a system to deal with “disinformation” and “extreme hoaxes”, but it veered off as the fact-checkers shifted to political fact-checking and the fact-checking was just too biased.

The societal shift back to rediscovering common sense, Wendell Krossa

In this link below Dave Rubin and guests comment on the shift now of many former US liberals to the right. They frame this as people coming to the “right” side, moving to the conservative side, but they note that some of these shifting liberals/Democrats are not wanting to fully embrace truly conservative positions. I find that a bit clouding/obfuscating of what is happening and what should happen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=202mI7qLY9s

The shift back to common sense after the last decade of Woke Progressive extremism is not about becoming conservative. I would clarify more that its about all of us rediscovering and re-enforcing the Classic Liberalism that was bequeathed to us from England over the last few centuries. Classic Liberalism as in the principles, systems of common law, and representative institutions that protect the freedoms and rights of all, equally. That is not something “conservative” or “liberal” as these terms have defined the differing sides of our Western societies over past decades.

Maybe somewhat “Libertarian-ish” but more its own unique reality and to be understood as such. Its own uniquely liberating approach to organizing societies.

Here is a reposting of the basic principles of a humane society, as Classic Liberal: Wendell Krossa

What do I mean when I refer to “Classic Liberalism”?

And as people talk about creating a “safe AI”, why not ensure that safety of AI by programing it with Classic Liberal principles?

Anyway…

Basic principles, systems, institutions of Classic Liberalism, liberal democracy, or Western liberalism.

Daniel Hannan in his Introduction to “Inventing Freedom” provides the following lists and descriptions of the basic features of a truly liberal society or civilization:

“A belief in property rights, personal liberty, and representative government…

“Three irreducible elements. First, the rule of law…Those rules exist on a higher plane and are interpreted by independent magistrates…

“Second, personal liberty: freedom to say what you like, to assemble in any configuration you choose with your fellow citizens, to buy and sell without hindrance, to dispose as you wish with your assets, to work for whom you please, and conversely, to hire and fire as you will…

“Third, representative government. Laws should not be passed, nor taxes levied, except by elected legislators who are answerable to the rest of us… the rule of law, democratic government, and individual liberty…

“The idea that the individual should be as free as possible from state coercion… elevate the individual over the state…

“Elected parliaments, habeas corpus (see below), free contract, equality before the law, open markets, an unrestricted press, the right to proselytize for any religion, jury trials…

“The idea that the government ought to be subject to the law, not the other way around. The rule of law created security of property and contract…

“Individualism, the rule of law, honoring contracts and covenants, and the elevation of freedom to the first rank of political and cultural values…

And this full summary:

“Lawmakers should be directly accountable through the ballot box; the executive should be controlled by the legislature; taxes should not be levied nor laws passed without popular consent; the individual should be free from arbitrary punishment or confiscation; decisions should be taken as closely as possible to the people they affected; power should be dispersed; no one, not even the head of state, should be above the law; property rights should be secure; disputes should be arbitrated by independent magistrates; freedom of speech, religion, and assembly should be guaranteed”.

Hannan’s book is invaluable for tracing the historical emergence and development of Western freedom down through the English tradition, from pre-Magna Carta to the present.

Definition of habeas corpus (varied online definitions):

“A habeas corpus application is used by persons who feel they are being wrongfully detained. Upon application, the individual is brought before a judge who will determine whether the detainment is lawful.”

“A writ requiring a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or into court, especially to secure the person’s release unless lawful grounds are shown for their detention.”

“The literal meaning of habeas corpus is “you should have the body”—that is, the judge or court should (and must) have any person who is being detained brought forward so that the legality of that person’s detention can be assessed. In United States law, ‘habeas corpus ad subjiciendum’ (the full name of what habeas corpus typically refers to) is also called “the Great Writ,” and it is not about a person’s guilt or innocence, but about whether custody of that person is lawful under the U.S. Constitution. Common grounds for relief under habeas corpus— “relief” in this case being a release from custody—include a conviction based on illegally obtained evidence; a denial of effective assistance of counsel; or a conviction by a jury that was improperly selected and impaneled.” (Miriam Webster)

One of the best at defining and articulating Classic Liberal ideals and principles, notably in the US version- Full interview of Vivek Ramaswamy on Lex Fridman podcast. Vivek for president. Note how Vivek frankly acknowledges and responds to deformities of Classic Liberalism on the right side of US society.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Qk_3a3lUw

Who knew that advocacy for mercy could spark such intense outrage and even violence, Wendel Krossa

Intro- How mercy, forgiveness, generously inclusive love incite rage in some people, notably in those dogmatically committed to retaliatory vengeance. The outrage intensifies when humanizing features are projected onto ultimate ideals and authorities like deity, thereby denying divine validation for those committed to retaliatory vengeance.

Moving right into my point….

The Luke 4 account of Jesus teaching in a synagogue illustrates how advocacy for mercy toward the “undeserving”, toward enemies and outsiders to one’s religion or ideology, incites murderous rage in people. That incident is where Jesus refused to affirm the theology of a retaliatory God to his audience, and instead, after reading the opening of Isaiah 61, he ended his message on the note of merciful deity- i.e. “The Lord’s favor”, neglecting the conclusion- “the day of vengeance of our God”. That omission enraged his audience, and they immediately tried to kill him by throwing him off a cliff.

He made his reading even more offensive by further illustrating it with God’s mercy toward an outsider to the Jewish religion. A “last straw” kind of poke at the zealous Jews that he was preaching to.

Note that the Luke 4 incident is where Jesus initiated his public teaching ministry. It was as though he was testing the water to evaluate audience reaction to this central theme of unconditionally merciful deity that would be further elaborated in his general message as recorded in Matthew 5-7 and Luke 6. In those collections of wisdom sayings he more fully sets forth his “stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God” (James Robinson), his theory of a universal, unconditional deity.

If Jesus had not realized it before, a few pokes at the bear would have quickly awakened him to how his message angered zealous true believers in retributory justice, inciting ferocious outrage. He then further illustrated his experience of that outrage with the story of the Prodigal older brother who was pissed at his Father’s forgiveness and generous welcome of the underserving rascal brother. Also, he told the story of the all-day vineyard workers who were pissed at the owner’s generosity toward the underserving late-comers. The reactions of these other characters in the parables may be the main point of such parables.

Universal, unconditional love toward undeserving, failing fellow humans, toward offenders and enemies, incites the worst of emotions in some people.

What is this impulse in us to become enraged by mercy toward human failure, to resist and fight the inclusion of enemies, to vilify human generosity toward all, to outright reject forgiveness and the expression of other humane values and practices? We see this expressed today, for example, in media, i.e. in the screaming rage of some at others for “normalizing” enemies by simply expressing common courtesy toward them.

What is this urge to take the harshest retaliatory response toward differing and failing others? And in extreme cases to advocate and engage punitive destruction of “enemies” and even celebrate that?

Again, for balance, note the qualifiers on the commonsense responsibility of justice systems to protect the innocent from violent offenders, the responsibility to incarcerate violent people in order to protect others, as the fundamental obligation of any government. This does not lessen the concurrent responsibility, a fundamental human obligation, to treat offenders humanely, as per restorative justice approaches.

Tolstoy in “Resurrection”:

“The whole trouble lies in that people think there are conditions/circumstances in which one may deal with human beings without love, and there are no such conditions/circumstances… One may deal with things without love…. (But) you cannot deal with men without it… It cannot be otherwise, because natural love is the fundamental law of human life.”

Love, and holding one another responsible for behavior, are not in conflict.

Moving along….

Critical to note in what Jesus says in the summary below of his main teaching points, is how he framed his message as “Do this and you will be just like God”. His teaching illustrates the common pattern of a “behavior that is based on similar belief”. Meaning that if you love unconditionally according to the series of Luke and Matthew precepts, then you will be like God who similarly loves unconditionally. Luke’s version of this sermon summarizes the entire message best- “Be merciful just as your God is merciful”. Or to summarize Matthew’s version of the very same material- “Love your enemy because God does”.

The varied elements in the Jesus message all point to unconditional mercy, unconditional love. Behavior that exhibits what God is like.

In the Matthew 5 and Luke 6 summaries of the teaching of Historical Jesus we have the stunning new theology of an unconditional God, a theological revelation never before presented to humanity by any mythology or religion. This stunning new understanding of God overturns entirely the highly conditional deities of all religious systems and their associated religious conditions.

The revolution in thought here is unequaled in history. It points to a transformation of consciousness that is infinitely beyond other approaches to religious reformism, especially reformism projects of the type that tinker at the periphery of religion and do not deal with the cohering center of the religious systems- i.e. the deity that hold the entire systems together.

The earliest religious theologies were formulated by the original priestly elites in those caves some 30,000 years ago (John Pfeifer in “Explosion”), and more likely the original features of theology were formed long before as the origin of sacrifice is far more ancient than the cave art. Since that prehistory origin of theology (i.e. ultimate ideal and authority), gods have been tribal, dominating, and threatening realities. They have been deformities of true humanity/humaneness. “Monsters”, according to psychologists like Harold Ellens.

Those primitive deity beliefs of the prehistory era then initiated what became an unbroken line of descent with the main features of all subsequent theologies/gods not varying much from the original archetypes.

Then a Palestinian wisdom sage emerges two millennia ago to state- No. There is no such God. There never has been any such reality. To the contrary, God is universal, no conditions love. Even nature tells us that, he claimed. How so? Well, sun and rain are given generously to all alike, equally. To both good and bad people.

His point- The monstrous pathology that we have inherited in our great religious traditions- i.e. tribal deity favoring true believers, damning unbelievers, a “King/Lord” that dominates humanity and threatens punitive destruction- that deity has never existed. There has only and always been no conditions love at the core of reality.

Jesus was the first in history to offer a stunning alternative to the horrific deity monsters that have dominated religions across history. And his fellow villagers tried to kill him for what he taught. It was just too scandalously offensive for them to even consider. Blasphemous.

He began his teaching ministry with an omission approach, by purposefully neglecting to affirm retaliatory vengeance in God. This would prepare the way for his later more direct statements that people should love their enemies because God loved God’s enemies.

It was clear to his audience what he had done in that Luke 4 first public foray into teaching. That was highly offensive to many who heard him, and he would illustrate that offense later in his parables- i.e. how good, righteous people were outraged at the unconditional mercy that he taught.

But first, return to his initial teaching foray and note that when he initially confronted and challenged the deeply ingrained belief in justice as some form of retaliatory vengeance, and validated by a retaliatory, punishing God, his own countrymen tried to murder him.

He initiated his teaching ministry by intentionally rejecting the fundamental belief of fellow Jews that God affirmed and engaged retaliatory justice. Jesus was probing and preparing people for his eventual full complex of statements on unconditional theology in his main message as recorded in Matthew 5: 38-48, and Luke 6:27-36.

He began the preparatory teaching for his stunning new theology by reading a well-known passage in Isaiah 61 where he ended on “the year of the Lord’s favor”, purposefully excluding the next statement- “and the day of vengeance of our God.”

Here is the Isaiah 61 section that he read in the Luke 4 account:

“The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners, to proclaim the year of the LORD’s favor… and…”

He left out the next completing statement of that passage- “the day of vengeance of our God.”

And then adding further insult to the already intolerable sense of offense arising in his audience, Jesus illustrated that unconditional favor of God with the incident of God healing an enemy of the Jews, a Syrian. That further affirmation of nontribal, unconditional mercy/love outraged his tribally-minded, vengeance-oriented fellow villagers beyond toleration. It enraged them to the point of murder. They hustled him out forcefully and tried to throw him off a cliff.

Apply this to ourselves- How do we feel that our offenders, the unbelievers to our religion, our enemies, should be treated by God? Would we join an angry crowd if someone in our religion, or ideological camp, challenged the deeply rooted idea of “proper justice” as punitive vengeance, and instead of retaliatory justice, they presented the stunningly opposite idea that God exhibited universally inclusive, unconditional mercy and love toward all?

Look at how Jesus further illustrated in his parables the outrage of many at mercy, forgiveness, and generous inclusion. Note the angry older son in the Prodigal parable, pissed at the unconditional mercy of his Father toward the wasteful brother (Luke 15). Look at the all-day vineyard workers pissed at the unconditional generosity of the vineyard owner (Matthew 20:1-16). Such unconditional mercy was not fair, it was not just, it was not righteous. It violated the proper order of things. It offended the deeply-rooted sense of “fairness” and “justice” as commonly understood and practised across history.

Humanity in general has been conditioned for millennia with the Zoroastrian cosmic dualism of a great Good God set in eternal warfare against an evil dark Force/Spirit and that fundamentally defines human dualisms and the human obligation to engage righteous wars against irredeemably evil “enemies” who must be violently purged from life. It undergirds human understanding of justice, in terms of the cosmic battle of good versus evil, with good understood as some form of harsh retaliatory vengeance.

The people in that first formal audience of Jesus were pissed at the mercy, inclusion, generosity, that he taught, that was exhibited toward, in their view, the undeserving. They fervently believed that their offenders/enemies deserved the very opposite- harsh punishment as proper justice.

Is that how we view proper justice? Then we most likely would join similar crowds trying to toss similar Jesuses off the cliffs.

(Insert: Again, while affirming that such merciful response is the free choice of people toward others in varied situations, I would not advocate this as a general policy for criminal justice that must, as primary responsibility, protect the innocent from violent assault. Violent offenders must be incarcerated to protect others as that is the fundamental role and obligation of any government. But certainly, the unconditional response taught by Jesus offers an ideal for a general attitude toward failing others, an attitude that tempers our application of justice toward offenders and enables us to maintain our own humanity in the face of evil by avoiding the pitfalls of retaliatory punishment that unleashes our impulses for harshly punitive response to the failures of others. An unconditional ideal orients us to more restorative approaches to justice and to more merciful treatment of our offenders.)

How do we get to this breakthrough insight of Jesus that God is an unconditional reality?

Begin with the general “Search for Historical Jesus” that recognized that he existed as a real person who taught some of the things that are recorded in the New Testament. However, the gospel writers added a lot more material that they claimed he taught but that contradicted his original teaching.

The “Jesus Seminar” is the third phase of the Search for Historical Jesus, and then, more specific to what the man taught, there is the research on the “Q Wisdom Sayings” gospel that is the closest that we get to what he actually taught.

In that material there is nothing of Paul’s Christ mythology, his re-affirmation of retaliatory, vengeful deity. Paul’s apocalyptic Christ re-enforced the mythology of ultimate vengeful punishment of human failure in the violent destruction of all life through apocalypse, to be followed by eternal violent destruction in hell. He epitomized justice as ultimate “eye for eye” vengeance.

Insert: Paul’s statement of his retaliatory deity- “Leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord”, Romans 12: 19.

Further, there is no claim by Jesus that he came as a Savior offering himself as a sacrifice to appease an angry God who demanded payment for sin and threatened apocalypse and hell.

The central point in the Q Wisdom Sayings gospel is that statement- “Love your enemy because God does”. Meaning that God is unconditional love. That is the sum and totality of theology that we need to know.

What the Palestinian wisdom sage actually taught was to love others, to love enemies. And that was validated by a God who loved unconditionally.

Added note: In his actual teaching there is nothing of establishing a new religion.

A reposting:

Guiding ideals/precepts of Historical Jesus (his central teaching):

“Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you. If you love only those who love you, what credit is that to you? Everyone finds it easy to love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Everyone can do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Most will lend to others, expecting to be repaid in full.

“But do something more heroic, more humane. (Live on a higher plane of human experience). Do not retaliate against your offenders/enemies with ‘eye for eye’ justice. Instead, love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then you will be just like God because God does not retaliate against God’s enemies. God does not mete out eye for eye justice. Instead, God is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked. God causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. Be unconditionally loving, just as your God is unconditionally loving”. (My paraphrase of Luke 6:32-36 or Matthew 5:38-48.)

This can be summarized in this single statement: “Love your enemy because God does”.

(Note: The moderating or humanizing influence of the above Jesus message is evident in the very content- i.e. what is said.)

Example of non-retaliatory, unconditional love: The Prodigal Father story in Luke 15:11-31.

The Father (representing God) did not demand a sacrifice, restitution, payment, apology, punishment, or anything else before forgiving, fully accepting, and loving the wasteful son.

The above statement and illustration by Jesus, overturns the highly conditional Christian religion and Paul’s Christ mythology. Paul, along with the rest of the New Testament, preached a retaliatory God who demanded full payment and punishment of all sin in a blood sacrifice of atonement before he would forgive, accept, and ultimately love anyone.

Added note:

A significant feature in the theologies of all 3 Western religions is the attribute of “holiness” or purity in God. Christians then argue that God cannot be unconditionally loving because God’s holiness takes precedence over love. God as holy must punish all sin thoroughly. He cannot excuse any sin. The holiness advocates claim that sin offends God, it besmirches the honor of God and thereby enrages God, and that offense must be made right through violent retribution, retaliation toward sinners or retribution vented toward a substitute for sinners as in the Christ myth.

And early Christian theologians argued that only the sacrifice of a godman is sufficient to atone for all human sin. The violent bloody murder of an innocent to appease a wrathful holy deity. Note also that while Paul repeatedly stated the “wrath of God” in Romans, John in Revelation takes the intensity higher, declaring the Christ tramples out “the fury of the wrath of God”.

People believing such theology therefore cannot opt for unconditional mercy but must share the furious wrath of God at sinners in order to properly honor the holiness of God. Hence, that explains part of the reason for their outraged reaction to any suggestion of unconditional mercy, forgiveness, or inclusive generosity toward failing others. They nurse the felt need to uphold holiness and justice as necessary for rebalancing offended justice and making things right again, to properly honor a just and holy God.

That was Calvin’s justification for burning fellow Christian theologian, Servetus, at the stake. Other Geneva Christians had urged Calving to exercise “love your enemy”. But Calvin would have none of that mercy. He responded that he must honor and restore the glory of God, God’s holiness, by killing the “false prophet”. Over Servetus’s refusal to move an adjective three words over in a sentence.

But consider that this belief in offended divine honor, that demands harsh response and punishment, is no different than the primitive honor killings in varied societies, where, for example, young women experimenting with modern cultural trends are killed for violating the honor of their male family members. The men, feeling dishonored by the “sin” of the young women, demand that their male honor be restored by harsh punishment of the “sinners”, by violent murder.

This is all archetypal stuff long deeply embedded in human subconscious and considered “the untouchable sacred”. Stuff that many people resonate with and therefore refuse to reconsider out of fear of blasphemy and consignment to hellfire.

Elite finance expert? Or carny barker for a cult? Wendell Krossa

Mark Carney is elbowing others to become Liberal leader and replace Justin Trudeau.

Historian Richard Landes has noted that the Bolsheviks tried to masquerade their movement as “science and modernity”, but they were still just “superstitious members of a salvationist apocalyptic millennial cult”.

See the full comment below on Mark Carney, WEF “soft socialist” and climate alarmist, seeking to bring his WEF-style climate crusade to Canada to reframe the Liberal party with his smoother elitist presentation, and thereby replace, but maintain, the destructive eco-zealotry of Justin Trudeau. Just another eco-cultist presenting as smooth operator. The very gimmick of the original Bolsheviks.

Yes, contemporary leftist Progressivism has wedded itself to the climate cult as noted by experts like Richard Lindzen and others.

Intro comments:

Carney is just another “carney barker” for the apocalyptic cult promoted by Trudeau, Al Gore, Joe Biden, and the host of other eco-zealots on the far-left Woke Progressive fringe. Woke Progressivism/neo-collectivism has, over past decades, developed a tight association with climate apocalypse insanity. This has to do with the modern neo-Marxist recognition that their front door approach of revolution to destroy capitalist civilization was not working because the capitalist system had improved the lives of workers. So they innovatively shifted to the back-door approach of infiltrating educational institutions to indoctrinate new generations of youth with socialism framed in the new skirts of Woke Progressivism.

They learned to smoothly wed their collectivist ideology to climate alarmism and specifically focus on CO2/fossil fuels as the great evil to purge and thereby more effectively destroy industrial civilization (CO2’s warming influence had reached public consciousness at that time).

Note that the basic tribal dualism in Woke Progressivism of victim/victimizer is just an update on the older collectivist “oppressed/oppressor” categories. And instead of private property ownership as the main identity marker of oppressors (yes, this is still in the mix), they added skin color as the identity marker for oppressed/oppressors.

Pay attention to the core themes of these leftist/climate apocalyptic crusades. Don’t be bamboozled by smooth-talking alarmists like Carney as they try to frame their positions as some form of science-backed common-sense normalcy and high-level elite economics. There is not a millimeter’s separation between Carney’s positions, despite his smooth presentation, and the “madness of crowds” lunacy that our societies have been subjected to over past decades, meaning the climate apocalypse crusade and its society-destroying decarbonization as salvation (i.e. “save the world” from the basic food of all life- CO2).

“Holy shitoli”, as my polite wife is fond of saying.

Just so as not to dillydally or lollygag around this, or mollycoddle it- There is no climate crisis. The best of atmospheric physicists (those guys at co2coalition.org, Wattsupwiththat.com, etc.) state clearly that the warming influence of CO2 is now “saturated” (i.e. the physics term) and hence any warming influence of CO2 won’t add much, if any more at all, to any possible further warming. So again, there is no “climate crisis”, as hysterically proclaimed in the primitive apocalyptic mythology that fuels the alarmist crusade to destroy Western civilization and its industrial base.

Meaning, as per my repeated conclusion stated here- There is no need to tax carbon or decarbonize our societies. None.

Note: More generally, my comment on Carney is about the cup of cold water that needs to be thrown in the face of many moderns to snap them out of the state of delusion they are in with regard to these cultic crusades driven by apocalyptic mythology. Too many moderns who identify as “secular, scientific, materialist, even atheist” still hold to the most primitive of inherited themes that have shaped mythologies/religions across history- i.e. myths of original paradise (better past, original golden age), then fallen people ruined paradise, life is now declining toward worse, toward ending in apocalypse.

Then follows the divine demand for salvation via sacrifice/payment/suffering (i.e. give up good life in civilization, embrace the “morally superior” low consumption primitivism of de-growth, de-development, decarbonization as in use less energy), and thereby appease angry Mother Earth/Planet.

The primitive Zoroastrian myth of cosmic dualism is also in the mix, where a Good God wars against an evil Force/Spirit and followers must therefore engage a righteous battle against evil enemies that must be purged from life, destroyed. And then true believers gain the promised salvation of restored paradise or utopian communalism.

These themes were first constructed by primitive minds in prehistory, then recorded in scattered form throughout early Sumerian/Akkadian/Babylonian written mythologies, and are also found in Egyptian mythology (i.e. “Return to Chaos, Destruction of Mankind”).

The basic complex of primitive themes was then embraced by Zoroaster to shape his more formal religion that subsequently influenced Western narratives and consciousness via the major Western religions. From there the basic complex of apocalyptic millennial themes was embraced by secular ideologies like Declinism and environmental alarmism. The entire mess of bad ideas is still primitive thought at its worst and moderns embracing such themes need the “cold water in the face” awakening to realize just what they actually believe- i.e. primitive religious extremism of the worst kind.

Carney included.

Mark Carney, another smooth-talking carney barker for a cult, Wendell Krossa

Carney represents his fellow Liberals all elbowing to replace Trudeau, just as he represents the larger tribe of the WEF elites and Woke Progressive decarbonization crusade worldwide. He is the latest replacement in the climate crisis crusade for far leftist Maurice Strong who helped author and originate this madness back in the late 80s/early 90s, along with James Hansen. Both taking up, whether fully aware or not, the 60s Marxist’s shift to anti-CO2 propaganda as a more effective approach to destroy Western industrial civilization. Marxists did that after failing to push their revolution through the front door of our liberal democracies.

Carney as leftist? Yes, he supports ESG, Occupy Wall Street, etc. as noted by Terence Corcoran and others in links below.

My point here? Smooth, intellectualized, elitist presentation does not change or hide the core of apocalyptic cult insanity that one is promoting.

I start with my conclusion from further below:

As posted often on this site, the finest climate scientists on the planet, the atmospheric physicists at “co2coalition.org”, have presented the clear evidence that the warming effect of CO2 is now “saturated” (a physics term) and much more atmospheric CO2 (e.g. doubling to 800 ppm) will contribute very little, if anything, to any further warming, if warming were to continue. Climate scientist Javier Vinos (“co2coalition.org”, “Wattsupwiththat.com”) says that we won’t know what will happen next with climate till the early 2030s as large-scale natural trends play out, trends influenced mainly by natural factors that overwhelm any CO2 influence on climate.

The above scientists add that there is no “climate crisis” and the mild 1.2 degree C warming over the past century has been beneficial to all life. So also, the increase in CO2, the basic food of plant life, has resulted in a massive 15% increase in green vegetation across the earth since 1980.

All to say, there is no scientific reason to tax carbon or ruinously decarbonize our societies.

Now on to the “carney barking” climate cultist Mark Carney.

Yes, I am stretching the meaning of “carnival barker” a bit to make a fit with Carney, cause nothing else out there quite rhymes the same, eh. I miss the “letter” in this but get the spirit of it.

Wikipedia: “A barker, often a carnival barker, is a person who attempts to attract patrons to entertainment events, such as a circus or funfair.”

I’ve included these comments on Carney to illustrate something larger- i.e. how cultic movements, extremist crusades, apocalyptic movements like Marxism, Climatism, etc. disguise their core nature with references to science, philosophy, modern ideology, etc. all to enhance appeal and acceptance by modern audiences. Despite the invested effort, they are primitive religious cults at core. Marx and Co were leading examples of this trick of cult cloaking, fairly successful in disguising their essential nature as extremist religious cults. Richard Landes and other historians/scholars have exposed this practice well.

Point- Don’t be bamboozled by the smooth-talking Mark Carney, an elitist who presents himself as a world financial wizard, among the world’s elite economic intellectuals, and the new savior for Canada. He comes clothed in global elitism, the highest educational status, experience at elite financial institutions, hobnobbing with the wealthy powerholders of elite institutions, and more.

But the reality he cannot deny, he is just another carny barker for an apocalyptic cult, the climate apocalypse cult. He is an eco-zealot of the very same commitment as Justin Trudeau and belongs to the very same apocalyptic cult. And indeed, he has mentored/guided Trudeau in embracing and implementing the destructive salvationism programs/policies of that crusade (i.e. decarbonization- “save the world” from CO2).

Behind the calmer exterior and measured style of expression, Carney is no different from the more ham-fisted alarmist Trudeau, just a smoother communicator than Trudeau. Carney has long been a central player in the worldwide climate apocalyptic crusade, a profoundly religious crusade no different from all apocalyptic millennial crusades preceding it. See the historians who have outlined the patterns, unfolding stages, and driving ideas/themes that identify such cultic crusades- i.e. Arthur Herman in “The Idea of Decline In Western History”, Richard Landes in “Heaven On Earth”, Arthur Mendel in “Vision and Violence”, David Redles in “Hitler’s Millennial Reich”, etc.

No matter that these apocalyptic prophets present themselves with the sophistication of wealthy elitism, they are, as historian Landes exposes below, “superstitious members of a salvationist apocalyptic millennial cult”. In the same category as the “barbarian theocracy cult” of the Bolsheviks who originally constructed the collectivist crusade that eventually birthed varied offspring down through history including today’s far-left Woke Progressivism and its DEI programs. The contemporary collectivist dualism of DEI “victims/victimizers” is a mildly reframed upgrade on Marxist classes of “oppressed/oppressors”. DEI adds the new twist of assignment to one or the other class by skin color. Also, add here DEI’s full-frontal embrace of collectivist “equity”.

Further, the ideology of Carney, presented with the face of the soft-socialism of Progressivism, is tightly associated with the climate crisis alarmism that has become central to the modern collectivist revolution. Climate alarmism was embraced by 60s/70s Marxists, when, recognizing their direct assault on capitalism was not working because worker’s lives had improved, they then shifted to their new approach to bringing down industrial capitalist civilization by attacking the fossil fuels that drove industrial civilization. This has been noted by atmospheric physicist and climate expert Richard Lindzen, among others.

Carney embraces the fundamentals of the same collectivist ideology that is promoted by those who more publicly identify as full-frontal socialist collectivists. Note in the links below- his embrace of the backdoor collectivist assault on business through ESG projects because it could not gain front door acceptance through normal democratic processes. Corcoran has also expressed Carney’s fanboy respect for Occupy Wall Street, etc.

Insert: Carney’s elitism reminds me of something that Matt Taibbi and Walter Kirn noted in their latest “America This Week” where they commented on “oligarchy” as the concentrated power and rule by the elite few, and how George Bernard Shaw pushed back against such elitism. Carney is very much a member of the “intellectual oligarchy” that Shaw spoke of.

Transcript- America This Week, Jan. 17, 2025: “The Annotated Final Speech of Joe Biden: A historically peculiar presidency ends on an oddly half-assed note”, Matt Taibbi, Walter Kirn.

https://www.racket.news/p/transcript-america-this-week-jan-6f1

Quotes on Biden’s last speech where he warned of the threat of “oligarchy”:

“Walter Kirn: They did. And I just came across a speech from a play Major Barbara by George Bernard Shaw. One of the most, how could I put it, most progressive characters ever to exist in the 20th century. Both a witty and accomplished playwright, one of the early members of the Fabian Society, the British Socialist Club, a nonstop drummer for social justice and so on. And it’s interesting, he gives a speech to, I think, to Major Barbara, who’s a Salvation Army person in this play, which is a rousing speech against oligarchy. And it could have been Donald Trump who spoke these words.

“Listen to this, “I now want to give the common man weapons against the intellectual man. I love the common people. I want to arm them against the lawyer, the doctor, the priest, the literary man, the professor, the artist, and the politician who once in authority is the most disastrous, and tyrannical of all the fools rascals and imposters. I want a democratic power strong enough to force the intellectual oligarchy to use its genius for the general good or else perish.” For Shaw, the oligarchy even extended to what we’ve come to call the expert class or the technocracy, as it were. And so on that score too, he represented the pinnacle of oligarchic rules so far.

“Matt Taibbi: Absolutely. The whole direction of their (Biden and Co) pandemic policy was listened to the experts. And this was drummed into us repeatedly that ordinary people did not have-

“Walter Kirn: It’s the whole basis of the disinformation misinformation push is exactly what Shaw says, these disastrous, tyrannical fools and imposters do once in power, which is they leverage their so-called authority and expertise to oppress or push around common people. Who would think that Donald Trump and a Shavian heroine would be speaking the same language? And who would guess that somebody (Biden) an heir to 60 years or whatever of democratic politics would really sound like the consummate oligarch in old terms, as he decries that?”

Weaving back to my point…

Apocalyptic prophets, as good innovators, use ever-changing phrasing to update and reframe their core beliefs and policies but they never stray far from the same fundamental system of ideas, the driving themes of their alarmism crusades, and hence, they never escape the same horrific outcomes.

As with Niemietz’s point re socialism as “The Failed Idea That Never Dies”, so these apocalyptic crusades, cloaked with whatever garments of modernism and science, remain “profoundly religious”.

Richard Landes has stated in his “Heaven On Earth” that Western intellectuals have persistently resisted the recognition that their Marxist heroes, despite their appeals to science (i.e. “scientific Marxism, historical materialism, scientific progress, etc.”), and their appeals to modernity, were little more than fringe religious nut cases.

Similarly, global collectivist elites, like Carney and colleagues, employ ever-modernizing categories/phraseology, identity markers, and promoting programs/agencies, all to deny to themselves the reality of what they are promoting, to mask what is at core just another apocalyptic millennial movement as profoundly religious as all the others preceding it.

There may be an element of defensive self-denial in the mix because to admit to oneself that you are a fringe religious nut case would be too much of a blow to one’s view of oneself as a respected intellectual, a highly-educated and broadly-experienced member of the international elite class.

Landes peels away the cloaking layers, added by Western intellectuals, to reveal the true nature these movements, whether in their Marxist, Nazi, or environmentalist alarmism variants, all rooted in the same primitive themes, beliefs.

In his chapter on the Marxist variant of apocalyptic millennialism, Landes notes the fundamental religious beliefs and nature of the heroes of the original Marxist crusade that formalized collectivism for the modern era. I’ve noted before Arthur Herman’s longer-term history of collectivism descending from Plato, down through Hegel to Marx.

Speaking of Michael Bakunin, Landes says, “Few other thinkers reveal so clearly the deep connection between religious and secular apocalyptic thought, in particular the adoption of an active cataclysmic scenario in response to disappointment…

“Bakunin gave himself over to religious passions that slid easily into messianic grandeur, in which he saw himself as another Jesus…

“In this abandonment of (formal, charismatic) religion and the zealous adoption of a (new religious) revolutionary creed, we find the roots of secular apocalypse”, “Heaven On Earth”, p.322-23.

Regarding Lenin, Landes quotes Donald MacRae, “What has led Bolshevism in our time to dominate some 800 million human beings is the subtle alliance of what can be recognized as a modicum of scientific truth with a salvationist religion”, p.330.

Landes details how modern secular societies believe that they are “rejecting all forms of religious superstition… (but) rather than having abandoned millennial beliefs, ‘modern’ industrial society invented a new, secular variant”, p.339.

Then commenting more directly on the Bolsheviks, this by Landes again gives some sense of the real nature of the climate alarmism that Carney embraces. Climate alarmism is just another variant of the very same structure of apocalyptic millennial beliefs that shaped Marxism and Nazism.

Landes quotes on the Bolsheviks:

He again notes the resistance among historians and social scientists to admit that Marxism-Leninism is a religious movement. Western intellectuals prefer to think of Marxism as related to the French Revolution, viewed by leftists as a movement of reason and historical progress and hence, “any attempt to put this totalitarian system in the category of a closed and barbarian theocracy is very often vehemently refused….

“Everybody who dares take the Bolshevik world as a religious community is considered as a traitor betraying the humanitarian ideals of the modernity of the French Revolution… If you see it in this sense, say the proponents of the project of modernity, the distance between the old and the new modern world would shrink too much and the debts to the Christian tradition would become too heavy. Thus, when you treat the Bolsheviks as a millennial sect you… betray the project of modernity and treat the Bolsheviks, despite their very modern efforts to industrialize backward Russia, as a medieval sect of obscure believers”, P.347.

Drawing from the good research of these historians of apocalyptic millennialism, I emphasize the tight connection of leftism with climate alarmism to show Carney’s true nature.

Marxist apocalyptic religion aligns solidly with environmental alarmism in terms of beliefs/themes that drive such crusades. Carney is an exemplary spokesperson for this cult. In addition to embracing leftist Progressivism (the new collectivist front), he also embraces the religious cult of climate apocalyptic.

His eco-zealotry, expressed more subtly than Trudeau, ultimately commits him to faithfulness to his cult. And his poorly-concealed commitment to climate apocalypse, and decarbonization salvation, will eventually further destroy Canada despite his background and experience in elite banking circles. His larger belief system in the apocalyptic climate crusade will eventually overwhelm any practical cautions from common sense economics. We see that endlessly from otherwise intelligent people- how apocalyptic renders them “Chicken Little” hysterical and irrational, making fools of otherwise smart people. I mean, look at Stephen Hawking over the final two years of his life. Sheesh, eh.

I point these things out to expose what is really behind the public statements, arguments, and approach of elites like Carney. They may present as smooth, scientific, logical and reasonable, having common association with the “consensus” decarbonization ideology and programs of elites across the West.

And while Carney may initially soften and moderate his approach to win converts, ultimately his commitment to the apocalyptic climate narrative will emerge in his policies if he gains power.

So pay close attention to the core themes behind Carney’s public statements- i.e. his embrace and promotion of climate apocalyptic, a “madness of crowds” crusade like few before in history. Carney has been central to this crusade, one of the leading prophets of apocalyptic like Al Gore who more directly states that we are living through the book of the apocalypse of Revelation. And though Carney is a smoother talking cultist than Greta Thunberg- his “how dare you”, in essence, is every much as zealous as her less-concealed cultic fury. He is simply a more well-spoken theologian of the same cult.

Carney’s policies will have the same eventual destructive outcomes as Trudeau’s more clumsy Woke Progressive approach. These two have worked closely together, with Carney functioning as mentor to Trudeau just as Freeland has mentored and guided Trudeau with the same leftist environmentalism. The destructive outcomes are every much like the more primitive Xhosa slaughtering of their cattle slaughter in 1856-57 thereby destroying their livelihood. With Trudeau, Carney, and Freeland the damage from their cult operates at a larger scale and causes more widespread harm.

Always look past the public presentations of people to see what they hold as their core worldview, their core beliefs, and in the case of climate alarmism, the core themes of religious extremism based in apocalyptic mythology.

Comment that Carney is the same as Trudeau

Carney is now supported by climate extremist Stephen Guilbeault who would not support him if Carney did not affirm the same eco-zealotry as Trudeau…

“The curse for Carney of the ‘crazy carbon tax’ minister endorsement: There are legitimate concerns about Guilbeault’s influence on Carney’s policies on energy and growth”, John Ivison, Jan. 22, 2025

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/mark-carney-steven-guilbeault-endorsement

Quotes:

“Steven Guilbeault, the activist turned environment minister, who has made it his business to ensure Canada’s energy business is regulated to death.

“Guilbeault emerged from the cabinet retreat in Quebec this week to tell reporters that he is supporting Mark Carney in the forthcoming Liberal leadership contest.

“It was a gift to Poilievre… calling the environment minister “the biggest loon in the Liberal government.”

“Carney is seeking to pretend the Liberals have changed, he said, but he is just as radical as Justin Trudeau.

“The support of the “crazy carbon tax minister” is proof of that, Poilievre said. Guilbeault wants to ban road-building, nuclear power, shut down the forestry sector to save the caribou and is against hydro-electric dams.

“The Conservative leader suggested that Guilbeault would not support Carney unless the leadership candidate had privately committed to keeping the carbon tax.

“The two have a “carbon-tax compact,” Poilievre suggested, without evidence.

““Carney is just like Justin — don’t be fooled,” he concluded….

“Guilbeault has long opposed all fossil fuel development and endorsed the idea that Alberta’s crude should be landlocked.”

Others on Carney’s leftism and environmental apocalypse:

Here Terry Corcoran notes the twinning of Carney with Trudeau

“Get ready Canada for ‘Justin Carney’: While he claims to be a Liberal ‘outsider,’ Mark Carney has been a backer of Justin Trudeau’s policies”, Terence Corcoran, Jan. 17, 2025

https://financialpost.com/opinion/terence-corcoran-get-ready-canada-for-justin-carney?tbref=hp

Corcoran opens with- “Mark Carney has been on the Canadian political leadership radar for more than a decade, bleeping away well before Justin Trudeau’s Liberals were elected in 2015…. Then he moved on to his guiding ideological theme, which is that if humans are allowed to pursue their own interests in a free-market economy, they will destroy life on Earth.

“Carney’s grand scheme to remake the Canadian and global economies, and impose a new moral structure on decision-making, was put forward through 570 pages of dense advocacy in his 2021 book, Value(s): Building a Better World for All. If he wins the Liberal party leadership race, Carney would certainly raise the political style and intellectual tone of Canadian politics, but in policy he’s really just another Justin.”

Corcoran adds regarding Carney’s progressivism, “His leftist sympathies were on display in 2011 when he said the anarcho Occupy Wall Street movement was “entirely constructive.””

Carney further embraced Greta Thunberg’s hysteria over climate and the “Net Zero Revolution”. Add here Carney’s embrace of ESG to achieve “divine coincidence.”

More on the real Mark Carney, the ‘carney barker’. Russ’s comment on Carney’s leftist elitism…

“It’s over for the Liberal celebrity candidate gimmick: Competent stars are chased out, and the incompetent ones aren’t of any use. What’s the point?”, Geoff Russ, Jan.17, 2025

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/geoff-russ-its-over-for-the-liberal-celebrity-candidate-gimmick

Russ opens saying, “Canada needs a break from star candidates.

“Justin Trudeau himself epitomizes the star candidate, possessing no specialized skills besides good presentation and teaching high schoolers. He was the ultimate celebrity politician who needed technocrats around him to govern well, only for him to alienate nearly all his brightest and best….

“It is difficult to escape the sense that Carney is far more comfortable literally rubbing shoulders with London’s A-listers like former Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson, actor Jude Law and Ghislaine Maxwell, partner of Jeffery Epstein, before she was convicted as a child sex trafficker. Carney’s campaign, it should be noted, has denied being friends with Maxwell.

“Shaking hands with one or two of Epstein’s friends and former clients is simply one of the drags of being a modern celebrity. Is anyone really going to turn down a handshake from Bill Gates?

“The real scandal is Carney’s career-long fondness for deepening western ties with China.

“China has not hesitated to kidnap our citizens and will likely be ready to invade Taiwan by the end of the decade. The Liberal leadership frontrunner’s last known meeting with Xi Jinping took place last spring, just months before he became an adviser to the Liberal Party of Canada and was floated as a replacement for Trudeau.”

Further note that Carney is solidly embedded with world elites:

“It doesn’t matter to Mark Carney if Canada survives: As a member of the global elite, he will always be free from the consequences of his political actions”, John Ivison, Jan. 16, 2025

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jamie-sarkonak-it-doesnt-matter-to-mark-carney-if-canada-survives

Also, on Carney’s ‘carney barker’ creds…

“How Carney plans to win the Liberal leadership and hold Poilievre to a minority”, John Ivison, Jan.15, 2025.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/mark-carney-liberal-leadership-2

Quotes from the article show that he positions himself on the collectivist spectrum toward soft leftism/socialism of the WEF group but is in terms of his core beliefs, the same as more hard-core varieties. He is committed to Net Zero that will destroy civilization as it is doing in Germany, Britain, and California.

“Canada Proud is running an ad portraying Carney as an out-of-touch elitist: a former governor of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England, an adviser to Trudeau and a member of the World Economic Forum….

“Carney believes Canada has low-risk and relatively low-cost oil but needs to do more work on the emissions side through technology like the Pathways Alliance carbon capture and storage project.

“While he does not support a cap on fossil fuel production, he is committed to net-zero emissions by 2050 (as are the 50 oil and gas companies who signed the decarbonization charter at COP28 in Dubai in 2023).

“Yet, he remains a proponent of ESG (environment, social and governance) investing that has become an anathema to many people.

“And he is certainly not as enthusiastic in his support of Alberta’s oil and gas industry as is Poilievre, who is specifically proposing to build energy infrastructure like LNG plants, pipelines and refineries…

“Carney himself remains a work in progress as a politician. Apparently, he did not appreciate the irony when he accused Poilievre of “seeing opportunity in tragedy” on the Daily Show, just before invoking the California wildfires as a justification for climate action.”

Nuf said, eh.

On his associations with today’s leftist forums… note that Woke Progressivism is a front of the new collectivism pushing for domination across Western liberal democracies. Tie all such movements back to the actual origins in historical collectivism by noting prominent guiding themes.

And this from Taube

“Carney claims to be a political outsider, but he’s very much on the inside: Carney first advised the Trudeau Liberals on their economic response to COVID-19 in 2020, and became a special adviser and chair of their economic task force last September”, Michael Taube, Jan. 16, 2025

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/michael-taube-carney-claims-to-be-a-political-outsider-but-hes-very-much-on-the-inside

Notes:

Conclusion (repeated from above):

As posted often on this site, the finest climate scientists on the planet, the atmospheric physicists at “co2coalition.org”, have presented the evidence that the warming effect of CO2 is now “saturated” (a physics term) and will contribute very little if anything to any further warming, if warming were to continue. Climate scientist Javier Vinos says that we won’t know what will happen with climate till the early 2030s.

The above scientists add that there is no “climate crisis” and the mild 1.2 degree C warming over the past century has been beneficial to all life. So also, the increase in CO2, the basic food of plant life, has resulted in a massive 15% increase in green vegetation across the earth since 1980.

All to say, there is no scientific reason to tax carbon or ruinously decarbonize our societies.

One more on Carney as leftist eco-cultist:

“Disaster number one or disaster number two for Liberal leader: Both Carney and Freeland were involved in the disaster that was Trudeau’s government. Who wants more disaster?”, Matthew Lau, Jan. 22, 2025

https://financialpost.com/opinion/matthew-lau-disaster-for-liberal-leader?tbref=hp

Quotes:

“Trudeau’s economic agenda was shaped and supported by both candidates… so they share responsibility for its disastrous consequences. If Trudeau’s record is a disaster, their records are, too….

“Carney was “deeply embedded in Trudeau’s circle for years,” as Calgary MP Michelle Rempel Garner writes… “Carney’s fingerprints are all over the Liberal policies that have driven up costs for ordinary Canadians,” Rempel Garner explains. “He’s long championed carbon pricing, praising Trudeau’s $170/tonne carbon tax as a ‘model for others.’” That is the same carbon tax that he and Freeland are now disowning….

“As Peter Foster wrote in these pages in 2021, “Mark Carney … claims that western society is morally rotten, and that it has been corrupted by capitalism, which has brought about a ‘climate emergency’ that threatens life on earth. This, he claims, requires rigid controls on personal freedom, industry and corporate funding.”…

“Trudeau prefers Carney, however, is nearly conclusive evidence he would be the worse disaster. Either way, the Liberal Party of Canada being led by one of these candidates is a disaster happening to a disaster.”

And another “one more”… More zealous than eco-zealot Trudeau

“Mark Carney is a climate zealot who won’t back off the Trudeau agenda: He has done more thinking and writing about climate change than the rest of the Trudeau caucus combined”, Don Braid, Jan. 24, 2025

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/braid-mark-carney-is-a-climate-zealot-who-wont-back-off-trudeau-climate-agenda/wcm/a7fb245b-a5c5-4196-bfc2-0a5f6a1225e5

“The former Bank of Canada governor is a climate activist of the most devoted and determined sort. He has done more thinking and writing about climate change than the rest of the Trudeau caucus combined….

“He ardently believes that the world economy, and certainly Canada’s, must be transformed as quickly as possible to avert the collapse of civilization….

““To meet the 1.5 C target, more than 80 per cent of current fossil fuel reserves (including three-quarters of coal, half of gas, one-third of oil) would need to stay in the ground, stranding these assets.”…

“More likely, we could expect an escalation of policies to phase out oil and gas and accelerate “just transition” in many areas of the economy….

“Investment dollars will take a quick look at Canada and turn south. Carney’s policies, difficult at the best of times, could further fuel economic disaster.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Bob Brinsmead- “Men never do greater evil than when they do it in the name of God.”

Common elements in “How to ruin a society”

Further below– “Some things that Michael Schellenberger, Matt Taibbi, Mike Benz, Jimmy Dore, and many others have exposed regarding elite manipulation of our liberal democracies over past decades…”

The outline of “common elements” below helps to understand what has happened in varied liberal democracies across the West- i.e. the elements that have facilitated a leftward shift, as in Canada under Justin Trudeau. Is this due to new generations of young people emerging from universities indoctrinated by Woke Progressive leftism of an extremist variety? Hence, the 50% of young people today who affirm that socialism/communism should be embraced to organize our societies. What role does the psychopathology of “left-wing compassion” play in this shift? As in the narcissistic impulse to virtue-signal unconcerned for the actual outcomes of the ideology and policies that you promote? These new graduates then populate all the main institutions/agencies of our societies- business, government, media, even intelligence agencies.

Note: Evolutionary Behavioral Scientist Gad Saad states that destructive socialist, and other ideas, were breeding over the last century to finally come to fruition on university campuses. We have all watched these ideas pushed across our societies in the lunacy of the Woke Progressivism of the last 10 years. Host Brian Kilmeade responds that the current surge of populism pushback against Woke is not a Republican resurgence but more the resurgence of common sense across Western democracies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pI1_pvSQb9M

Coming soon– How the Jewish Christian priest Waraqa mentored Muhammad over 45 years to embrace the fundamentals of Ebionism. Waraqa was the Ebionite priest in Mecca, cousin to Muhammad’s first wife Khadija.

Muhammad embraced the basic themes of Waraqa’s gospel to the Hebrews (an earlier version of the gospel of Matthew) and Waraqa’s God. But while acknowledging his debt to the earlier “book”, he failed to embrace the moderating message of Historical Jesus that was a critical element of early Jewish Christianity.

This is my response to the Piers Morgan interview of Jordan Peterson, and others, where panel members argued points for which religion was better- Christianity or Islam, among other topics related to the British ‘mass rape of children scandal’ recently publicized by Elon Musk. The discussants missed the fundamental point that all three Western religions share the same fundamental themes of their inheritance from Zoroastrianism. They are all much more alike than different from one another.

All three fail most egregiously on the cohering center of their belief systems- the nature/character of deity. The most profound breakthrough insight in all history- on deity- was presented in the first decades of the new CE era and all three either missed it, refused to embrace it, or even purposefully denied and buried it. And that was the denial of the ultimate liberation movement for humanity, liberation from millennia of enslavement to threat theology.

The comment below- “Understanding the common elements in collectivist approaches”– is sparked by the discussion of Pierre Poilievre and Jordan Peterson on how the far-left socialism of Trudeau and his ministers has ruined Canadian society, Wendell Krossa

Note, for example, around the 55-minute mark as they discuss what went wrong with Justin Trudeau, his fundamental socialism, assisted by his energy minister Steven Guilbeault who states openly that he is socialist. Trudeau has implemented his policies with the assistance of the socialist NDP. However, Trudeau has taken the Liberal party ever further into “far-left liberalism, far-left socialism”, guided by others like Chrysta Freeland, the WEF socialist.

The Trudeau ideal is, as Hegel and Marx argued, that the state becomes the embodiment of the “will of the people”, the collective that is governed by elites who imagine and claim that they know best what the will of the people is and feel obligated to coerce citizens to embrace that “common or greater good”. The collectivist vision of governing elites requires an expanded state and state powers to assist their project of controlling populations with oppressive detail on how to live, what to say and think, to ensure that the people become the pure and noble communalist citizens that elites demand they become, according to the collectivist utopian vision.

This collectivist vision has been implemented by Trudeau through the expansion of central government, by some 40% over the past decade. And the inevitable consequence of all such socialist experiments has again been replicated in Canada- i.e. commoner citizens are worse off than ever before. The common good as common immiseration.

Listen to both Peterson and Poilievre detail the statistics on how far we have fallen from previous standards of prosperity that we enjoyed, to the mess that we are in today. The always and inevitable outcome of socialist experiments is widespread impoverishment and misery, as detailed by Kristian Niemietz in his “Socialism: The Failed Idea That Never Dies”, and in other histories of socialism.

To paraphrase Barack Obama’s comment re Joe Biden, “Marx and crew really know how to fuck things up.”

There is good comment below by Poilievre on how Trudeau has implemented the utopia that Jagmeet Singh and other socialists want, and hence the mess today of a destroyed Canada. They discuss how Trudeau has taken the Liberals further left into extremist socialism than even the former NDP. Older, former NDP leaders state this is true of Trudeau’s far leftism.

What we have today is the socialist “utopia” and it is a “hellscape” as Poilievre says.

Note that Robert Owen’s “communalism”, Marx’s communism, and socialism in all its subsequent varieties (i.e. democratic socialism, social democracy) are all forms of “collectivism”- where the ruling elite dictate and control the lives of commoners, for their good of course, for some utopian “greater good” of the collective. The achievement of some greater or common good requires the subjection of individual rights and individual property ownership to the collective.

Trudeau’s transformation of Canada illustrates how socialists now approach Western liberal democracies to shift them toward collectivism, through increasing the size of the state/government and the associated necessary increases in taxation and regulation. This is based on their belief that the all-controlling state, governed by noble and enlightened elites, expresses the will of the people. This belief descends from Plato’s vision of the nanny state governed by Philosopher Kings dictating what is best for citizens (the myth of “benevolent rulers”), as noted by Arthur Herman in “The Cave and The Light: Plato versus Aristotle and the Struggle for the Soul of Western Civilization” (more detail below).

Exhibiting the creative impulse, innovation… Presenting the old in ever-new dress… No one likes a naked emperor…

Note also that socialists today are pushing the shift to collectivism via the Woke Progressivism ideology that is the front of the new (neo-) collectivism, with its DEI tribal dualism of “victim/victimizer” as the new take on the older Marxist tribal dualism of “oppressed/oppressor” categories (capitalist property owners versus property-less workers and peasants). The new marker of which category or class that you belong to, is based on your skin color, as in the new “Woke Racism”.

This latest program to install collectivism across our societies also involves, just as in bare bones Marxist communism, removing private property from citizens to be redistributed by the enlightened elites and their bureaucrats who believe that they know best how to spend citizen’s income and property. And then to further control the citizenry and push them toward the elite’s utopian vision of all becoming true “communal people”, elites and their bureaucrats increase the regulatory burden to control all areas of commoner’s lives. Elites do not trust commoner citizens, the ignorant “deplorables”, to know what is best for them and the greater society.

As Arthur Herman states below re Plato’s totalitarian collectivist vision- “Rulers who are also the city’s philosophers, the moral and administrative keepers of the state, the people who make sure everything else in society works… the class of Rulers are above all a class of legislators and lawmakers. Through good laws, even the lowest and least-educated citizens will learn to be just and virtuous… In this way, an ideal society and even an ideal people will result”, (“The Cave and The Light: Plato Versus Aristotle and the Struggle for the Soul of Western Civilization”).

The corrective response to this collectivist totalitarianism will require, most critically, diminishing the size of the state, decreasing taxation, and decreasing regulations. Massively so, reducing in proportion to the massive growth of governments in liberal democracies over past decades. Getting government out of citizen’s lives. Note also here that Magna Carta was very much a protest against taxation by elites without citizen approval.

(See discussion of Milton Freidman’s estimate of the optimal size of government for the best results that deliver “the most good to the most people”- I believe William Bernstein covers this in “The Birth of Plenty”.)

The best response to collectivism is to implement the Classic Liberal approach as illustrated by Javier Milei in Argentina, a liberating approach that is transforming the economy and the entire Argentinian nation back to a healthy state that protects and promotes the rights and freedoms of all individuals, equally. (See his interview by Lex Fridman- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NLzc9kobDk&t=12s )

State elites and bureaucrats, through the above totalitarian approach used by Trudeau, enrich themselves while impoverishing citizens. As Peterson and Poilievre note, there has been a massive shift of wealth under Trudeau’s socialism, a transfer of citizen’s wealth to elites. And this exposes the great lie of socialists that they operate the collectives “for the people, to express the will of the people”.

Here is the link where Jordan Peterson interviews our next PM, Pierre Poilievre, on the details of what is coming for Canada when he becomes leader, and what has gone wrong. Good, detailed discussion…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dck8eZCpglc

Here is some more on the guiding ideas, principles, ideals behind what is happening in our societies today….

First, some definitions of collectivism

This general one from Google:

“The practice or principle of giving a group priority over each individual in it.”

Another:

“A political or economic theory advocating collective control especially over production and distribution.”

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collectivism

Another:

“A theory or political system based on the principle that all of the farms, factories, and other places of work in a country should be owned by or for all the people in that country.”

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/collectivism#google_vignette

This last one refers to the Marxist rejection of private property and state confiscation of all property (“nationalizing” the economy, the state taking ownership of the “means of production”), and that is done with the validating claim that the ruling elites will operate the economy “for the people”. Something that has never been accomplished by socialist systems, as Kristian Niemietz explains.

“Socialism in the sense which self-identified democratic socialists define it… a democratized economic planned collectively by ‘the people’, has never been achieved anywhere and could not be achieved. Economic planning can only ever be done in a technocratic, elitist fashion, and it requires an extreme concentration of power in the hands of the state. It cannot ‘empower’ ordinary workers. It can only ever empower bureaucratic elites.”

A few intro notes:

Even within societies structured according to the supremacy of individual rights and freedoms there is much common concern of individuals for community and larger society, and voluntary contributions to such.

The Classic liberal approach best prevents tyranny and totalitarianism by redistributing power back to the people through protecting the rights and freedoms of all individuals, equally. Hayek said that dispersing power among competing individuals was the best preventative against totalitarianism.

The dispersal of power in society is accomplished through common law systems and representative institutions that truly serve the people by protecting their individual rights and freedoms, equally. By not centralizing power and control via increased government, taxation, and regulation.

Socialists have never understood that centralizing power and control in the hands of “enlightened vanguards, benevolent leaders, noble rulers, etc.” has never produced good outcomes. Plato tried to implement his collectivist approach when his friend took power over a Greek state and the citizens concluded that it was a worse tyranny than the previous dictator.

A notable difference between the collective and individual systems is the role of the voluntary free choice of individuals to contribute to larger communities. This freedom for self-determination over private property was central to Magna Carta. That document was pivotal to the subsequent historical trend of protecting the rights and freedoms of all individuals, equally, with no taxation without the consent of the citizens.

How elites gain and hold power over commoners, Wendell Krossa

Understanding the common elements in collectivist approaches that enable elites to gain and maintain their control over populations, notably using the totalitarian’s formula- “fear=control”.

What we are seeing across varied Western liberal democracies, in a shift leftward, is a sort of “soft socialism” approach being implemented by increasing the size of the government with the necessarily associated increases in taxation and regulations. While some of the national leaders of such an approach may deny any straightforward commitment to socialist ideology they do hold the belief that government is responsible to create wealth and jobs, a belief hardly different from the straightforward belief of socialists/collectivists that the governing elite must nationalize the economy and operate it “for the people”.

This is as old as humanity- i.e. the impulse and actions of “special” people to establish the elite/commoner divide, where they, elites, rule and control the commoners. It’s a history of how elites validate their powerholding over others, how they deny the fundamental obligation of love to serve, to respect and protect the rights and freedoms of all individuals, equally.

Elements/stages in the elite endeavor to establish control over others in societies. Advice to wannabe elites…

(1) Irresponsibly incite fear in populations– The more extreme the alarm, exaggerated even to apocalyptic-scale, the more effective in inciting the survival impulse in people and thereby rendering people susceptible to irrational “salvationist” solutions. Create hysteria, “madness of crowds” eruptions, panic.

H. L. Mencken,

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary”, In Defense of Women

Push the narrative of something good that has been lost, ruined, destroyed, and now a huge injustice exists and must be righted, the lost thing must be restored, or we all die.

(2) Blame humanity– Create guilt and shame in people, play on the myth of original sinfulness, that you commoners all know that you are bad to the bone, greedy, selfish pigs. And frame even the impulse to improve one’s life and one’s family, frame this most basic form of love as something evil. Frame the fundamental human desire for a better life as part of what is wrong with the individualism of capitalism. Affirm with Marx that property ownership from individual effort is the world’s number one evil, especially when successful people accumulate too much property, in your estimation.

And contrast societies oriented to free individuals with the falsely imagined utopia of collectivism, and the subjection of individuals to collectivist elites as commitment to “greater good, common good”. Who can argue against the terminology “greater/common good” as so obviously pointing to things “right, true, just, good, and noble”. The collectivist vision stirs the virtue-signaling impulse in many people- i.e. the embrace of socialist-like goals- to overcome one’s sense of guilt and shame for being a greedy, selfish individual.

Blame humanity- the “intruder, virus, cancer” on the natural world. Use anecdotal evidence of human destruction. Ignore or dismiss the full big picture and long-term trajectory of indicators that show life improving. Anecdotes help to distort the true state of things.

Sources on how to get to the true state of things…e.g. Julian Simon’s “Ultimate Resource”, Bjorn Lomborg’s “Skeptical Environmentalist”, and many more that reveal humans as “more creators than destroyers”.

Further on blame humanity- Richard Landes presents the four main dividers that elites use to construct and validate their domination:

(a) Legalize elite privilege with laws. (b) Stigmatize the manual labor of commoners. (c) Control information and technology, especially weapons. (d) Maintain the sense of elite honor, and their domination of society as critical to their honor, and consequently their right to defend their honor with force and violence. Hence, war as the sport of kings. (p. 216-17, “Heaven On Earth”).

(3) Push the narrative of increasing human evil in civilization (Arthur Herman on human “degeneration theory” as part of general theory of the Declinism of life in “The Idea of Decline In Western History”). According to this mythology, humanity is degenerating in civilization because of abandoning the noble savage state of a simple, low-consumption lifestyle in hunter-gatherer communalism. That primitive existence made for “strong and pure” humans more “connected to nature”, versus the modern era’s soft and degenerate humans in comfortable civilization. Human progress is framed as degeneration- in the topsy-turvy world where white is now black, and all is upside down lunacy.

Further, push the fallacy that people using natural resources are thereby ruining nature (i.e. the “limited good” fallacy of primitive tribal societies, now embraced by limited resources ideologies like “Ecological Footprint”). In such mythology, the original wilderness world was the original paradise. All has been declining since more people in the world (“population bomb”) began using more natural resources to enjoy the good life.

(4) Following the above- Humanity is threatened with the decline of life toward apocalypse– a great final punishment is coming for sin, a great destruction of all- i.e. the ultimate threat of “return to chaos”- the primal early fear of primitive peoples (see Mircea Eliade on “The Eternal Return”, etc.).

(5) Then establish the cohering center to this mythical complex of themes- i.e. There is an angry deity/force behind life that is threatening punishment and destruction, even violence to extremes. The creating Reality is pissed and threatens the total annihilation of all life. The Mother of all Daddies is really mad.

(6) This arouses in people the desperation for salvation/survival. Threat theology has long been beaten into human consciousness, and responded to with the demand to appease the angry gods. Hence, the sacrifice and offering industry over the millennia, conjoined with the early myth of “people created to serve the gods, to feed the gods, pacify the gods”.

Today’s myths of gods needing pacification with sacrifice continues in new “secular” versions with new gods like “vengeful Gaia, punitive universe, angry Planet/Mother Earth”, payback karma” etc.

I trace the roots of these themes back to their origins in ancient societies to emphasize how old and primitive all this is. It is not the new enlightened, modern insights and ideals that true believers of today wish to frame it as. Marx and his “scientific history” was primitive irrational mythology.

Add here the element of the early emergence of “special people” in societies, the shaman/priests who claimed to know the secrets of how to pacify the angry gods. They claimed special insider knowledge with which to control scared others.

The “fear=control” formula of totalitarian elites comes to the fore in the demand of shaman/priests that others submit to their claims to know the mysteries/secrets of the invisible realm of gods, and how to appease the gods and get benefits/blessings from them. But all must submit to the authority of the priests, to Plato’s “Philosopher Kings, Noble Rulers”, who will tell the commoners how to live and find their way to truth, right, good, and justice.

Those special people are to be revered as obviously divine, appointed by the gods, to be the elite Rulers of lesser others, the commoners (see Helmut Koester on Hellenism and Plato below).

Present yourself as the savior figure with the plan of salvation for all, a scheme that establishes you in power, in control.

This is all archetypal stuff, subconscious, and most people just respond intuitively to these themes. They respond emotionally when they hear these themes in new narratives like climate alarmism, Woke Progressivism, etc. People respond and embrace new movements shaped by these themes because they resonate as true, right, good, and just.

Kristian Niemietz: “Emotional satisfaction, not rational thinking, and despite contrary evidence, dominates our choice in beliefs.”

The salvation schemes of totalitarians consist of two main parts:

(6a) Make a sacrifice, an offering– i.e. give up the good life in modern capitalist civilization, and return to the primitivism, the communalism of early noble savages. Add here the myth that suffering is necessary for redemption, like those monks denying themselves and living in isolated monasteries to achieve salvation. This is derived from the Christ myth that suffering is how we pay for sins.

(6b) Part two of elite salvations schemes- You are obligated to then violently purge some evil threat, the enemy other who differs, the unbelievers/deniers of your apocalyptic narrative, the selfish individuals and their private property in the free market.

Violent purging is the “coercive purity” of socialist revolutions (i.e. the French and Marxist revolutions where elites believed they had to “force people to be free” in collectivist society, for their own good of course. And notably, collectivist elites (e.g. Babeuf, Marx) sought to free people from the evil of private property- “Abolish private property and evil will vanish from the Earth”, (p.291, Heaven On Earth).

Landes offers extensive detail on the “romanticism of violence” by Marx and his followers, their delusional belief in their noble cause to purge evil and liberate humanity to collectivist utopia.

Violence is willingly embraced by socialist revolutionaries most especially when they sense the possible collapse of one of their crusades to dominate a society. Disillusioned with failure and rejecting the possibility of loss of power, they then shift to the phase of “exterminate or be exterminated”, the fanatical commitment to desperate measures to avoid the loss of power.

Insert note: After recognizing the general Western public would not embrace their collectivist revolution via public democratic processes because capitalism had actually improved the lives of workers, 60s Marxists had to find another means to bring down Western industrial civilization.

Their creative solution? What fuels capitalist civilization? Ah- fossil fuels. At the time they realized this, reports had been made public that CO2 had a warming influence. So there was the key element for a new alarmist narrative re capitalist civilization. A new threatening evil to center a new apocalyptic narrative. CO2 was made the new marker of the evil human consumption of resources and enjoyment of the good life in capitalist civilization. Red joined green to become the “watermelon” cooperation of leftists and environmentalists seeking to destroy Western industrial civilization.

The climate warming apocalypse borrowed from the much earlier shift of the Sumerian apocalypse by Flood to Zoroaster’s apocalypse by fire. The modern climate apocalypse narrative actually embraced both elements of primitive apocalypse- i.e. imminent flood apocalypse by rising seas and apocalypse by Earth on fire from rising CO2. The “same old” framed in new versions.

Zoroaster’s fiery purging of the world with molten metal was also continued in Paul’s fiery apocalyptic return of his Christ (Thessalonians- “Lord Jesus will return in flaming fire to destroy…”). See also the apocalypse in Revelation.

(7) Frame this mess of irrational mythology in terms of a battle of good against evil as per Zoroaster’s cosmic dualism. Portray your side as exhibiting inculpable righteous heroism, you fighting the monster/evil of the differing others, the deniers/unbelievers that must be slain, conquered, exterminated because they are irredeemably evil. Demonize your opponents as satanic, deceived by Satan, more than just ordinary evil- as “demonic” enemies.

Some researcher of Islam had noted (I can’t recall his name or book), for example, that in Islam Jews were viewed as a worse evil than the average unbelieving “infidel”. Jews were layered with the additional feature of “demonic/satanic”, hence deserved special hatred.

Insert note: The hero’s battle against some evil monster/enemy is easily deformed by further layering it with the element of tribal dualism, Zoroaster’s myth of a cosmic dualism of good against evil that ignored the fundamental oneness of humanity, a oneness based on “Mitochondrial Eve”, quantum entanglement, or the “spiritual insight” of the ultimate Oneness of divine unconditional love.

Push this tribal dualism to extremes of contrast by framing yourself as noble and pure in contrast to your chosen enemy as irredeemable evil and “existential threat” that must be exterminated to save some world.

Collectivists have adopted this tribalism as expressed in their dualism of oppressors/oppressed defined as those with private property and those without or lacking enough property to matter. They ignore/deny their own elitism that oppresses and ruins societies as nothing before in history- i.e. the 100 million murdered by collectivism in the last century.

Note the common smear by leftists today of the populism movements that are pushing back against left-wing totalitarianism- i.e. “right wing extremism” as dog whistle for “white supremacists, racists”. Populist movements tend to be a mixed bunch of conservatives, centrists, independents, and moderate left/liberals.

(8) Then, finally to complete the complex of common elements/themes, offer the carrot promise of the restoration of the lost paradise, with fewer people in a more wilderness world, with a return to the pristine communalism of noble savages, and the “moral superiority” of their shared low-consumption lifestyles.

Present people with your vision of a utopian future of shared goods, and no defiling private ownership. This comes today through neo-collectivism/neo-Marxism, the neo-communalism of Woke Progressivism where enlightened elites rule the collective, using the State (Hegel’s state as embodying the will of the people) and state coercion to force populations toward the elite goal of an imagined common or greater good that can only be attained through more collectivism.

The principle of commoners submitting to ruling elites (the elite/commoner divide of societies) descends down from the ancient pre-state world to Plato and the Hellenism that shaped Christianity and Paul’s Lord Christ myth. The grand themes, that validate the elite/commoner divide of societies, have always been in the background (i.e. archetypal, subconscious) undermining and countering the impulse of commoners for freedom and self-determination.

Arthur Herman on Plato (“The Cave and Light”)

Herman outlines Plato’s vision of the perfect society as a collective- “the Republic is all about raising the collective order to the highest-pitched perfection… (where Aristotle’s politics point toward Western individualism and democracy) Plato’s communitarian vision points very much in the other direction with ugly consequences… Plato (insists) that the perfect political community must have no private property: the Republic is in effect the first Communist state (run by “Philosopher Rulers”)…”

Plato divides the perfect society into classes of common workers, soldiers, and Rulers who are the administrative elites of the state and control all. The Rulers “who are also the city’s philosophers, the moral and administrative keepers of the state, the people who make sure everything else in society works… the class of Rulers are above all a class of legislators and lawmakers. Through good laws, even the lowest and least-educated citizens will learn to be just and virtuous… In this way, an ideal society and even an ideal people will result.”

That is the utopian vision of Greek totalitarians like Plato.

Herman details how this collectivist vision of Plato continued down through history “From New Harmony, Indiana, to Pol Pot’s Cambodia, they are all efforts to create a brand-new society according to Plato’s basic premise, that through laws based on the highest and most certain knowledge, we can create… perfect society.”

His collectivist vision “abolishes private property” and tries to impose harmony and order through elite legislation, (p. 66-67).

The link from Plato to contemporary collectivist totalitarianism?

Plato’s vision of collectivist utopia descended to philosopher Georg Hegel who exerted a major influence on Marx.

Hegel argued for “someone” to ensure equity among the people.

“That someone… is the state. Its development as an autonomous actor in history is in fact the next and final stage of freedom beyond commercial society. It smooths out all the problems of capitalism… What Rousseau and Romantic nationalists had seen in the idea of the Nation, a community shaped by laws, customs, and traditions into ‘one single being’ or General Will, they can now achieve concretely through the actions of the State. Under its aegis, teams of bureaucrats become a virtual cadre of Philosopher Rulers who bring order and justice to a needy world. As in Plato’s Republic, justice is the source of freedom not the other way around.

“Hegel is the true godfather of the nanny state, or welfare state- with Plato standing beside him… (all state programs) become justified as the State acting to protect us from ourselves because the State is our Better and Higher Self. As Hegel wrote, ‘The Government, regarded as an organic totality is the concrete embodiment of the indwelling Spirit of the People itself’…… ‘Society and State are the very conditions in which Freedom is realized’. Indeed, in time humanity will discover that obeying the laws of the State is the only true freedom”, (416-17).

Kristian Niemietz exposes the socialist/collectivist elite’s claim that their enlightened rule of collectives is “on behalf of the people, for the people”, using state coercion and laws to enact the “will of the people, express the will of the people”. It never works out to that end, says Niemietz.

Here, once again, is his good summary of the inevitable outcome of the elite approach to controlling collectives “for the people”:

“Socialism in the sense which self-identified democratic socialists define it… a democratized economic planned collectively by ‘the people’, has never been achieved anywhere and could not be achieved. Economic planning can only ever be done in a technocratic, elitist fashion, and it requires an extreme concentration of power in the hands of the state. It cannot ‘empower’ ordinary workers. It can only ever empower bureaucratic elites,” (“Socialism: The Failed Idea That Never Dies”).

Now… Moving onto the Christian embrace of the common elements of collectivist approaches, elites dominating collectives to control commoners..

Paul modelled his Christ myth according to Greek views of special people as divine beings. His shaped his Christ as a Lord deserving honor and obeisance from all, an ultimate model for elite domination over others. With his Christ he validated ruling elites deserving honor as divinely appointed rulers, with threats of severe punishment to dissenters (see, for example, Romans 13).

Here below is Helmut Koester on the Hellenism that shaped Paul’s Christ-ianity (“History, Culture, and Religion of the Hellenistic Age”). Paul embraced the varied strains of Plato’s Hellenism that would further impel the ongoing historical descent of this elitist collectivism down into future generations. Historical Jesus, a Palestinian wisdom sage, was subjected to the Hellenistic process of viewing special people as divine.

“(in Hellenism) Divinity was associated the powerful deeds, great acts, and extraordinary human gifts of some people. Notably in Greek biography, divinity was manifest in kings/emperors and through their military and political achievements, also in the special abilities of great poets, philosophers, and artists. Their special skills were believed to be divine manifestations that made them better than others. Special abilities and accomplishments were believed to be “miraculous”.

““Hellenistic biographies incorporate miracle stories in a strikingly uncritical manner”.

“Koester says the early Christians later adopted this Hellenistic approach in creating the biographical account of their founding hero (Jesus), hence the many miracle stories in the gospels.”

Paul buttressed his Christ myth further with the other common elements of totalitarian collectivism (see full detail in books like Romans). He embraced the mythology of an angry God who incites fear by threatening people. A God pissed at sinful people for ruining his perfect creation, Eden, thereby sending life into decline toward the final punishment of humanity in the apocalyptic destruction of the world. That threat was followed by the demand for salvation via violent sacrifice and violent purging of evil from the world. Then came the promise of salvation in utopian communalism.

Paul’s protégé Luke, in his “biographical” account of Paul’s life in Acts, set forth the ideal of collectivism as the divinely approved model for human society. Luke’s account demonized private individual property for inciting divine wrath. In Acts 2 and 4, he illustrates “true love” as the communal sharing of all property. Meaning, God is obviously a collectivist and, as the Ananias and Sapphira incident reveals, God hates and violently destroys individualism and individual private property. There, Marx had his Christian model and validation.

Historical Jesus had previously rejected elite privilege and domination of others.

His message stated there was no angry God seeking to retaliate against sinful humans with threats of apocalypse. There was only the non-retaliatory love that non-tribally includes all, forgives all, and generously grants the gifts of life- i.e. sun and rain- freely to both good and bad people.

Further rejecting the divine basis of elitism, there was no dominating Lord to function as an ultimate model/ideal for humans, but to the contrary, Jesus reframed divine greatness as serving others. And in the Jesus message (i.e. “Q Wisdom Sayings” gospel), there was no demand for blood sacrifice as appeasement, or demand to engage a righteous war to purge evil. Meaning, there was no tribalism of true believers versus unbelievers.

To get the Jesus insights clear as new archetypes to shape a new narrative- Pull his central teaching out of the distorting Christological context of the New Testament, just as Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy argued. And like Jesus, go directly to the ultimate ideal at the core of the old religious narratives- deity- and transform that.

As this site repeatedly notes- Understand something of the contrast between Historical Jesus and Paul’s Christ myth as detailed in the general “Search for Historical Jesus”, notably, in the latest stage of this search in the “Jesus Seminar” books, and also the “Q Wisdom Sayings” gospel research.

Build yourself an entirely new narrative. Don’t fear to engage the shaman’s experience of dying to something old, and experiencing rebirth to something entirely new, to experience disintegration of the old, and re-integration around the new, as in a new understanding and approach to life.

A starter kit for new narrative construction: “Humanity’s worst ideas, better alternatives” (Old story themes, new story alternatives).

http://www.wendellkrossa.com/?p=9533

A repost of Lex Fridman on special people– What Plato noted as people who were considered divine and hence to be specially honored as such.

From “Hating that some people are better than others”, Wendell Krossa (revised, updated)

“The earliest elites emerged as shaman/priests. Those early “better than others” associated themselves with deity as validation of their being more special than others. They were anointed by deity to lecture and dominate others for their good.

“Helmut Koester (“History, Culture, and Religion of the Hellenistic Age”) adds detail on how the belief that some are better than others was developed in Greek biography over the more historically immediate BCE era.

“Divinity was associated the powerful deeds, great acts, and extraordinary human gifts of some people. Notably in Greek biography, divinity was manifest in kings/emperors and through their military and political achievements, also in the special abilities of great poets, philosophers, and artists. Their special skills were believed to be divine manifestations that made them better than others. Special abilities and accomplishments were believed to be “miraculous”.

““Hellenistic biographies incorporate miracle stories in a strikingly uncritical manner”.

“Koester says the early Christians later adopted this Hellenistic approach in creating the biographical account of their founding hero (Jesus), hence the many miracle stories in the gospels. Further, “It is not surprising that subsequent literature, especially the legends of Christian saints is entirely dominated by miracle stories”, p.131-132.

“In those ancient traditions we see the developing pattern of associating dominant figures and their great public deeds as special, making them “better than others.” Note how those “better than others” appealed to deity for validation of their specialness.”

Post to discussion group: Wendell Krossa

“Watch this… Here’s a “holy shitoli” for any still thinking that we are not propagandized and lied to constantly by media. As Drew Pinsky said, “Don’t believe a thing media or government tell you”.

“At the 16-minute mark, listen for just a few seconds to Jimmy Dore reading the time that Stephen Colbert, Seth Meyers, Trevor Noah, and John Oliver, at the same moment, repeated verbatim Nancy Pelosi’s points about the border crisis being caused by Trump, all on same night. Others have noted this strangely immediate coordination of points (usually anti-Trump, anti-Republican) coming out all together in media, using the very same terms.

“In this link, Dore plays the interview of Stephen Colbert interviewing Claire Danes, an actress, as she talks about the CIA intervention in news media and Hollywood. Watch Colbert’s reaction as she blurts this out and he tries to immediately change the topic.

“Then Dore plays a video clip of RFK revealing how the CIA propagandizes Americans through varied media outlets like Rolling Stone, The Smithsonian, National Geographic, Washington Post, Nature, New York Times, and was even exposed for manipulating Twitter against conservatives and for Democrats. This was what Frank Church tried to stop and did for a while till the CIA found a way around his blocks back in the 70s. The Twitter Files showed the CIA and FBI silencing people they did not like, acting for the Democratic party.

“Others have noted that producers of Hollywood movies have to get CIA pre-approval of scripts. RFK notes what happened at the Church hearings where it was revealed that some 400 journalists in American media were cooperating with the CIA (the biggest names in the business). The CIA continued to compromise journalists all over the world.

“Then Dore plays the clip of a CIA agent telling people that the major function of the CIA is propaganda- to influence people’s minds by planting false stories with journalists. Agents buy the journalists confidence by first offering them several true stories followed by a propaganda story. Or they find ways to compromise journalists so there is no need to cultivate them.

“Near the end, Dore replays Colbert’s reaction to Claire Dane exposing the CIA association with news journalists and how Colbert has to immediately react and redirect the conversation as she has revealed too much.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXGGfwimlw4

Some things that Michael Schellenberger, Matt Taibbi, Mike Benz, Jimmy Dore, and many others have exposed regarding elite manipulation of our liberal democracies over past decades… Wendell Krossa

The point of these exposures is to reveal how we are lied to by governments and their propagandizing media, making a mockery of freedom in our liberal democracies. While much of their research applies to the US, it is illustrative of similar elite shenanigans across Western societies.

They note the Frank Church hearings on the CIA meddling in media to control public narratives- i.e. the compromising of some 400 US media personnel back then, including the most well-known journalists.

https://www.levin-center.org/frank-church-and-the-church-committee/

They further note the contemporary intelligence agency meddling in media (last decade) to push Covid lies and validate destructive lockdowns, to cover up stories like the Hunter Biden laptop and thereby influence the outcome of an election, to push the Russiagate lie to discredit a political opponent in an effort to overturn a democratic election, to constantly censor political opponents (i.e. Twitter Files revelations, ongoing Google bias in search results, control of Wikipedia, etc.).

The elites who demanding power and control over our societies, work behind the scenes with intelligence agencies to maintain their control over state bureaucracies, information, and they scheme and manipulate endlessly for control of the resources and wealth of societies.

The above journalists, along with others, note that Western liberal democracies have shifted far left under the influence of Woke Progressivism (i.e. Canada under Trudeau, the US under Biden, etc.). This has provoked many citizens to embrace populist movements to restore the Classic Liberal freedoms and rights of all individuals, equally. As Winston Marshall stated in his Oxford debate with Nancy Pelosi, “Populism is democracy”.

Alarmed elites, fearful of losing their privileged positions of domination and control of liberal democracies, have smeared and demonized populism as “Far-Right, or Rightwing extremism”, dog whistle code for “White supremacism, racism, etc.”

Elites, working with corrupted intelligence agencies and other state agencies, have over the post-WW2 decades focused on destabilizing and overthrowing foreign governments, governments they had framed as “authoritarian threats to democracy”, namely the Communist and other left-leaning governments, but also just nationalist governments wanting control over their own economies and the US did not like that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1GONgRrdKs

These elites, and their co-opted agencies, have now shifted from their previous focus on foreign states as threats to democracy, to now demonize domestic anti-elite movements like populism as the new “authoritarian threats to democracy”, democracy defined by the elites as “the consensus of state institutions” that they control (Mike Benz on Joe Rogan).

Elites view the populism crusades to restore Classic Liberal protection of the rights and freedoms of all individuals, equally, as the great threat to their domination and control of liberal democracies from behind the scenes.

It appears the elites who have been destabilizing and overthrowing democratically elected governments around the world for decades, had no problem turning on their own democratically elected government to try to destabilize and overthrow it with the Russiagate fraud.

https://www.racket.news/p/why-is-russiagates-origin-story-redacted

To add to the ongoing exposures by the above independent journalists and podcasters…

Note, in this link, Mike Benz’s detailed exposure of the massive infrastructure that elites have constructed behind the scenes (“censorship industrial complex”) to censor any opposition and their continued program to push the agenda of the military industrial complex.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrJhQpvlkLA

This is the continuation of destabilizing and overthrowing democratically elected governments- notably Ukraine in 2014- to enable US access to the resources of such nations and to further the domination of other nations by the “US empire”.

And this from Joe Rogan and guest Matt Walsh…

These comments by Rogan and Walsh on how the leftist bureaucracy in the US will nullify the populist movement of Trump. Walsh is right that state agencies, populated by leftist progressives, will fight any change from Trump policies, just as they did to the previous Trump administration.

Before moving on with Rogan and Walsh’s comments, I would remind readers that the infiltration and control of US government agencies and bureaucracies by majority leftist elites/employees, precedes the collapse of the Soviet Union during the late 80s, early 90s. The public perception/delusion that collectivism had died with that collapse was mistaken.

In recent years we have been informed that decades earlier, 60s Marxists had refocused their assault on Western civilization and had chosen to go through the back door into higher education systems to indoctrinate new generations of young people (e.g. Richard Lindzen, Niall Ferguson, and others have commented on this).

That back-door approach came to fruition in the 90s as a majority of far-left professors were pumping out indoctrinated students to populate all sectors of society- i.e. state agencies, media, and even the intelligence agencies. According to a 2017 poll, a majority of these young people “preferred to live in a ‘socialist, communist, or fascist nation than in a capitalist one’”.

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/commentary/young-americans-support-abstract-and-unworkable-socialism

The collectivism of the younger generation was given creative new expression in DEI and its new tribal dualism of the two classes of “victim/victimizer”, with the assignment to either class now by skin color. This is a revived discrimination and racism, termed “Woke Racism” by John McWhorter.

It’s the same old tribal dualism of Marxism- i.e. “oppressor/oppressed” with assignment to class according to private property ownership or lack thereof. That is still in the mix of today’s collectivism.

It will take some major public education re Classic Liberalism principles, systems of common law, and representative institutions to counter the failed idea of collectivism/socialism and its horrific destruction of human societies.

Back to Rogan and Walsh…

Walsh and Rogan note how leftists accuse Trump of potentially weaponizing the justice system, which is exactly what they have done for years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjEHJpEqsYQ

As Rogan says, how can you be so blind to even say that Trump will weaponize the justice system after what you have done for years, and you refuse admit that you are doing that right now to him. Rogan notes that Trump did not do that in his first term because, according to him, “It would be a bad look”.

Walsh adds that contrary to the leftist charge that Trump is a “dictator”, he does the exact opposite and does not wield power, even when he should. They both conclude that Trump was probably “the least dictatorial person”.

I would add that Trump’s decrease of the size of government, his lowering of taxation rates, and his massive decrease in regulations, were all the exact opposite of what dictators do. In doing those things, he gave up power and control at a scale never done before in US history.

(Note: As with many others I would parse my comments with the qualifier that I do not affirm all that Trump says or does, but generally affirm the populism that he represents that seeks the restoration of Classic liberal principles, common law, and representative institutions that protect the freedoms and rights of all individuals, equally. This populism, is embraced by Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy, RFK, Tulsi Gabbard, and many others from all sides- i.e. moderate liberals/leftists, centrists, independents, moderate conservatives, etc.)

The elite totalitarianism/collectivism that is coming at us through far-left Woke Progressivism is the real threat to democracy today. The populist movement across Western societies, that is democracy, is a pushback against this neo-totalitarianism.

Here is another example of leftist denial of the wrong that they are actually doing now, and their projection of that wrong onto others.

https://www.public.news/p/desperate-need-for-censorship-behind

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Common elements in “How to ruin a society”

“People seized by an apocalyptic alarm can become great dealers of death” (paraphrase of Landes)

After the “here we go again” attack in New Orleans… Wendell Krossa

The military guy, following the 2014 eruption of ISIS violence in Syria, urged this- “You can crush these episodes of violence with military force, but they will just keep erupting until you go after the ideas that drive them”. But that will require the approach of going to the very root contributing factors and many people shy away from what has been presented to them by religious traditions as “blasphemy, heresy…”, as in tackling the prominent religious themes of our world religions.

Historian Richard Landes stated this just below, following his detail on how apocalyptic millennial themes drove Marxism to murder 100 million people last century, and Nazism to start a war that resulted in the murder of 50-60 million people, and before his chapter on environmental alarmism as another mass-harm crusade driven by the very same apocalyptic millennial ideas…

“The study of Nazism’s appeal, of Hitler’s charisma, belong to the field of millennial studies, whether one wishes to designate Hitler’s efforts as religious or millennialism as having secular variants. Only then can we identify the key problems of how movements go from the margins to the center of a society/culture, how they pursue their millennial goals, and how they respond… to cognitive dissonance, frustration, and failure… (Hitler) is not so much the measure of the unthinkably, the impossibly evil, as he is the measure of how, with modern technology and an only partially developed civil polity, a nation, a people, seized by, ridden by a millennial passion, can become one of the great dealers of death in human history” (end of ch.12).

His point? Until we deal with the religious ideas that drive such madness, we will only see further such eruptions of madness. Again, those root contributing factors.

Where are these apocalyptic millennial ideas protected and promoted today? They continue to dominate the major world religions, as well as dominate “secular/ideological” versions like climate alarmism conjoined to the neo-Marxism of Woke Progressivism, and are also promoted by the Hollywood public story-telling machine where apocalyptic millennialism dominates movie narratives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_apocalyptic_films

I would add to Landes’ research, that at the core of apocalyptic millennial mythology is the most critical of all religious ideas- i.e. the cohering center that is threat theology, the myth of an angry God who promises to punish and exterminate people with violent destruction. And consider psychologist Harold Ellens’ point that such a deity, held as ultimate ideal, then incites and validates the same punitive, destroying violence in followers. “We all become just like the God that we believe in” (Bob Brinsmead).

I repeat these comments because few have stated the issue better than Ellens. Here below psychotherapist Zenon Lotufo is quoting Ellens in his book “Cruel God, Kind God”…

“There is in Western culture a psychological archetype, a metaphor that has to do with the image of a violent and wrathful God (see Romans, Revelation). Crystallized in Anselm’s juridical atonement theory, this image represents God sufficiently disturbed by the sinfulness of humanity that God had only two options: destroy us or substitute a sacrifice to pay for our sins. He did the latter. He killed Christ.

“Ellens goes on by stating that the crucifixion, a hugely violent act of infanticide or child sacrifice, has been disguised by Christian conservative theologians as a ‘remarkable act of grace’. Such a metaphor of an angry God, who cannot forgive unless appeased by a bloody sacrifice, has been ‘right at the center of the Master Story of the Western world for the last 2,000 years. And the unavoidable consequence for the human mind is a strong tendency to use violence’.

“’With that kind of metaphor at our center, and associated with the essential behavior of God, how could we possibly hold, in the deep structure of our unconscious motivations, any other notion of ultimate solutions to ultimate questions or crises than violence- human solutions that are equivalent to God’s kind of violence’…

“Hence, in our culture we have a powerful element that impels us to violence, a Cruel God Image… that also contributes to guilt, shame, and the impoverishment of personality…”.

“As Harold Ellens says, “If your God uses force, then so may you, to get your way against your ‘enemies’”.

“Q Wisdom Sayings” gospel research reveals that Historical Jesus went to the root of the problem of human narrative themes and ideals, and their influence on human life, and offered the stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God, a universally loving, unconditional God, who gave sun and rain to all alike, with no exclusion, no retaliatory destruction of “enemies”. Jesus went to the ultimate root of the deity, the highest human ideal and authority at the core of our meta-narratives.

“There should be no more eye for eye retaliation but, instead, love your enemy because God does. How so? God gives sun and rain (the two critical gifts necessary for survival in agrarian society) to both good and bad people alike. Be unconditionally merciful just as your Father is unconditionally merciful”.

Using the primal pattern of “basing behavior on similar beliefs in some ultimate reality or ultimate ideal”, Jesus argued- Be like the God, the highest ideal that you believe in.

That new cohering center of non-retaliatory, no conditions love should have revolutionized human narratives with entirely new supporting themes to influence human thought, emotions, motivations, and responses/behavior- i.e. the ultimate ideals of no tribalism, non-dominating relating, nonpunitive justice, nonviolence, non-apocalyptic, etc.

The “single most profoundly humane insight in the history of human ideas” should have liberated human minds and spirits as nothing ever before, it should have liberated humanity from the enslavement to millennia of threat theology, the worst form of slavery ever constructed. The “stunning new non-retaliatory theology of Jesus was his greatest contribution to the history of human ideas”, James Robinson.

But two decades after Jesus, Paul rejected that stunning new theology and retreated to re-establish the theology of a violent, threatening and retaliatory God to center his new Hellenistic religion. Paul’s main statement of his re-affirmation of primitive theology- “’Vengeance is mine, I will repay’, says the Lord” (Romans 12). Paul couched that within a similar “behavior based on belief” setting that mirrored Jesus’ earlier “behavior based on belief” statement of his theology. Paul directly confronted the theological breakthrough of Jesus to repudiate it.

Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy set the outlines of the task before us if we are to solve the ongoing problem of violence in our societies- i.e. Distinguish the “diamonds/pearls” of Jesus from the “d___, sl___ and m___, g____” of Paul’s Christology that buried the message of Jesus.

They were simply pointing to a fundamental human responsibility- i.e. to distinguish between good and evil at a very foundational level, in terms of the themes of our meta-narratives.

This point can be argued and dismissed (and most commonly it is)- i.e. the influence of these religious themes on our lives today. But historians like James Tabor (“Paul and Jesus”) have nailed the issue that Paul’s apocalyptic Christ myth is still the most influential idea/ideal shaping most everything in Western civilization, as well as the wider world.

Insert from Tabor’s book:

“The message of Paul, which created Christianity as we know it, and the message of historical Jesus and his earliest followers, were not the same. In fact, they were sharply opposed to one another with little in common…

“Paul is the most influential person in human history and realize it or not, he has shaped practically all we think about everything… the foundations of Western civilization- from our assumptions about reality to our societal and personal ethics- rest in a singular way upon the heavenly visions and apparitions of the apostle Paul. We are all cultural heirs of Paul, with the well-established doctrines and traditions of mainstream Christianity deeply entrenched in our culture. In contrast, Jesus as a historical figure… has largely been lost to our culture”.

The Search for the Historical Jesus, its latest phase in the Jesus Seminar, and most critically, the research on “Q Wisdom Sayings” gospel, have all been pointing to the core issue that yes, there was a historical person named “Jesus”, and he said some of the things recorded in the New Testament gospels. But his actual message, while included in the New Testament, has been largely distorted (even “buried” according to Jefferson and Tolstoy) by the larger context that focuses on Paul’s Christ myth. Also, much of what has been attributed to Jesus by the gospel writers is added material that contradicts his main theme of an unconditional deity.

The root of the problem should not be ignored, that we all become just like the God that we believe in, meaning more generally, that we become just like the highest ideals that we hold in our narratives, whether religious or secular.

And no, none of the above is advocacy for a “pacifist” stance in the face of evil (i.e. the “de-carceration, decriminalization” policies of Woke Progressivism in US cities). It is the most fundamental of human responsibilities (of criminal justice systems) to protect the innocent, meaning the obligation to restrain the violent, to incarcerate violent people in order to protect others. The most basic responsibility of human love is to hold all responsible for consequences of behavior, as critical to human development and maturity.

When things go full-frontal insanity and totalitarianism raises its ugly visage there are human spirits who also rise to stunning levels of heroism to meet the moment in history. J. K. Rowling? Yes, but also Amy Hamm herself. She is the nurse who simply expressed admiration for Rowling and Canadian trans activists went after her to vilify and cancel her. Well, look what emerged. This incredibly well-spoken writer and fiercely free spirit who refuses to bow to the madness of crowds. Our own Vancouverite- Amy. You go girl.

Ah, the courage of the heroic few inspire the rest of us. Others emerging as similarly heroic and seeing clearly the issues at stake- Elon Musk, Vivel Ramaswamy, Michael Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi/Walter Kirn, Jordan Peterson, and so many more….

Become truly woke to the totalitarians who are trying to destroy our civilization… coming at us through the varied fronts of Woke Progressivism, DEI, ESG, “fight against disinformation/misinformation”, and others. And here in BC our premier Eby has been every bit as fanatically crazy as Trudeau in pushing this insanity of Woke Progressivism.

See the link here for all the related links that Hamm included to illustrate her points. The spirit of the Classic Liberals that came out of Britain is still alive in the J. K. Rowlings and others.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/amy-hamm-j-k-rowling-saved-western-civilization

“J.K. Rowling saved western civilization: The billionaire Harry Potter novelist stood up for women and opened the door for society to push back against woke progressivism, writes Amy Hamm”, Jan.2, 2025

More on how apocalyptic deforms human narratives, consciousness, personality and life, and entire societies.

“Climate Anxiety: Manufactured Hysteria Masquerading as Science”, Charles Rotter, Dec. 30, 2024

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/12/30/climate-anxiety-manufactured-hysteria-masquerading-as-science/

“Sometimes you stumble across a piece of “research” so self-serving, so packed with assumptions, and so nakedly designed to push a particular agenda that you almost have to admire the brazenness. The Lancet Planetary Health recently published an article titled “Climate emotions, thoughts, and plans among US adolescents and young adults.” On the surface, it purports to be a large-scale survey analyzing the mental health impact of climate change on U.S. youth. Beneath the veneer of academic rigor, however, lies little more than a thinly veiled manifesto for aggressive climate policies, rooted in the hyperventilating world of climate alarmism.

“The authors claim that the emotional burden of climate change is creating widespread despair, anxiety, and life-altering fear among adolescents and young adults. Their evidence? Self-reported feelings and a whole lot of presumptive correlations between weather events, climate narratives, and mental health.”

My added conclusion: The mindlessness here is astounding- terrorize and traumatize generations of children with climate apocalypse then survey them to see the damage that you have done, and use that as evidence for more climate hysteria and coercive, state-mandated action that is destroying societies with decarbonization. Ruin the future of these children even more. “Madness” is a mild descriptive of this.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on “People seized by an apocalyptic alarm can become great dealers of death” (paraphrase of Landes)

Projects for 2025- Focus on the real monster and enemy of humanity

This site starts the new year continuing to expose the real meta-monster behind many of the eruptions of violence in human societies, behind the varied crusades for totalitarianism, whether religious or secular. They are driven by the same complex of mythical themes that have always been the main monster of humanity, our real enemy, from the very beginning of early humans creating myths to respond to their primal impulse for meaning and purpose. Wendell Krossa

This is about probing what it is that deforms human narratives, consciousness, personality, and at scale, entire societies. That same complex of mythical themes that drove Marxism, Nazism, and now environmental alarmism (and also drives neo-collectivism as in the Neo-Marxism of far left Woke Progressivism and DEI).

More on the quest of this site to understand the ideas/themes that shape and drive human behavior, especially to understand the ideas that validate the behaviors that are destructive to human well-being, and at-scale, destructive to entire societies.

I have a bent, like many others, to join endeavors to “save the world”. I want to look at problems and try to understand what is behind them, what are the root contributing factors. I do this with varied public issues and problems, like the climate alarmism panic of the past three decades and its destructive decarbonization plan. What the hell is this really about? What drives this “madness of crowds” episode?

My interest in root contributing factors to public crusades like climate alarmism arises from long-ago experience in my family religion- Evangelical Christianity. That experience provided me the insight of feeling firsthand the impact of “threat theology” religious beliefs, to feel, with the immediacy of personal experience, how such “cruel God” theology deforms human personality with fear, anxiety, shame, guilt, despair, nihilism, and violence. Yes, violence.

I get how religious ideas of an angry God who threatens to punish us with apocalypse and hell, how such themes incite the survival impulse. And that survival desperation renders many susceptible to salvation schemes. It disables people to the cowering state of not even questioning the destruction of their society that is required to “save the world”, because they are promised utopia just beyond the destruction of the world. Think of average good Germans during the Weimar years as they were primed with the apocalyptic millennial vision of the Nazis. And think, similarly, of how we have been primed with the apocalyptic millennial vision of climate alarmists over the last three decades.

My personal experience of the harmful influence from the more destruction oriented religious themes helped me to appreciate how primitive apocalyptic millennial ideas carry good people along till they will embrace policies and crusades that harm themselves and others. It’s the religious-incited desperation for salvation. It’s the “fear=control” formula of totalitarians. Scare people and then you can manipulate them to embrace your salvation schemata. Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Projects for 2025- Focus on the real monster and enemy of humanity

Atheism or religion? Nah. Let 8 billion flowers bloom.

See below Jordan Peterson’s interesting analysis of Justin Trudeau and the psychopathologies of narcissistic, even psychopathic leadership.

We hear interesting commentary today on the revival/return of religion as many are recognizing that the atheism of the past few centuries has left some kind of mental/emotional hole in human spirits- i.e. the recognition of something missing in our endeavor to be human, something fundamental to the human impulse for meaning, purpose, Wendell Krossa

On the title above. My response to the too common polarized options that we present to people. Either this or that. Simple-minded dualisms of entirely opposite things. Is this some residual influence from Zoroaster’s cosmic dualism of good versus evil? Some “archetypal” leftover in the collective unconscious?

Note this, for example, from Free Press, typical of this line of argument

“How Intellectuals Found God: Almost 150 years after Nietzsche said ‘God is dead’, some of our most important thinkers are getting religion. Peter Savodnik meets the new theists”, Peter Savodnik, Dec. 28, 2024

https://www.thefp.com/p/how-intellectuals-found-god-ayaan-hirsi-ali-peter-thiel-jordan-peterson?utm_campaign=email-post&r=vl4wv&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

But much of the contemporary return to religion just revisits and re-embraces what has been handed down to us from a primitive past, without critically analyzing what was valuable in religious traditions and what was wrong, what was the “psychopathology” in the mix. Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Atheism or religion? Nah. Let 8 billion flowers bloom.

New Year’s ideas to transform narratives, to liberate consciousness and life

See below a revised reposting of “Hating that ‘some people are better than others'”, on the Lex Fridman interview of Jordan Peterson re the “spiritual” basis of human equality.

See also new comment on “The single most important thing that we will learn in life, the single most important thing that we will ever do, the single most important contribution that we will ever make to peace and order in the world…” (“Greatest”? When talking about transcendant realities, superlatives are justified.)

This good commentary from Matt Taibbi– “Thankfully, Some Things Never Change: A few reflections on an extraordinary year, as we give thanks and burn the Yule log”, Dec. 24, 2024

https://www.racket.news/p/thankfully-some-things-never-change

Matt rehashes some of the madness that we have lived through over the past decade but concludes, “Mad scientists who think they can redesign human experience are always undone by eternal truths that arrogance won’t allow them to grasp, one being that life isn’t so bad”.

Speaking of madness, former leftist/Democrat Dr. Drew Pinsky

Dr. Drew in just 2 mins, or so, nails mainstream media for propagandizing people to excesses of hysteria and delusion over the past 8 years, to the point that people have become literally mentally ill, losing rationality. He says this madness peaked with Covid. So, deal with these people, says Drew, with “compassionate firmness”. Don’t argue with them as you are not dealing with rationality.

The Woke Progressives driving the hysteria, delusion, and dividing the country have been like a cult, says Drew, and cults separate families, demanding that people should not associate with their families at times like Thanksgiving, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7GcjQGSje4

Varied new scientific reports are confirming that CO2 levels are already “saturated”, a physics term meaning that further increases in atmospheric CO2 will contribute little or nothing to any possible further warming. And the current levels are highly beneficial to plant growth and crop productivity.

“Science Shock: CO2 is good for the planet, peer-reviewed studies suggest”, Chris Morrison, Daily Skeptic, Dec. 24, 2024

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/12/24/science-shock-co2-is-good-for-the-planet-peer-reviewed-studies-suggest/

Morrison says, “None of this work will be reported in the mainstream since it disrupts a ‘settled’ climate science narrative tied to the political Net Zero fantasy.’

He adds that CO2 levels were much higher in the past and all life flourished.

As always, my conclusion from such evidence- There is no scientifically justified reason to tax carbon or decarbonize our societies, to embrace the mass-harm of Green extremism.

Main site theme: “Don’t be afraid its going to be alright.” Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on New Year’s ideas to transform narratives, to liberate consciousness and life

What is the real nature of the human struggle for freedom? (A New Year’s project)

More on the larger social issue of the elite/commoner divide in our societies, Wendell Krossa

The struggle for freedom from domination is fought and won most critically inside each of us. The “Hero’s quest” struggle against our real enemy- i.e. most notably or critically, the “evil triad” of inherited animal impulses to tribalism, domination, and punitive treatment of differing others. This affirms Solzhenitsyn’s point that the real battle of good against evil runs through the center of every human heart. We win the great battles of life by first taking care of what is wrong inside each of us. Not “sinfulness”, but residual things from our animal past.

And at some level of consciousness most of us feel these things naturally, i.e. the desire to be free of what we sense is subhuman- those animal impulses inside us- and to experience what it feels like to be truly human, fully human. We get this at some level of consciousness, what we call the difference between right and wrong, good and bad.

Honing a bit more the focus to the real nature of the human struggle for freedom…

The real battle of good against evil takes place at the most fundamental of levels, as a battle against the bad religious ideas (religious ideas as ultimate ideals) that have from the beginning validated our worst impulses. Some call them “archetypes”. And they tell us that the archetypes reside in the human subconscious and emanate their influence from there. Hence, the 95% of human behavior that is subconsciously initiated. So they say.

Moving along… Probing or looking past the societal level of our daily lives. (“Societal level”? The struggles between varied groups in public- i.e. society-level battles over differing ideologies, beliefs, policies, etc.) Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on What is the real nature of the human struggle for freedom? (A New Year’s project)

Stuff behind public debates on “this and that”

Observe the varied public debates on this and that, and associated crusades, and then take note of what goes on behind the scenes of the public displays of this and that. That behind the scenes manipulation gets us to the real story of life, Wendell Krossa

Again, I place the points below within the larger historical framework of elites constantly pushing the elite/commoner divide on human societies and commoners pushing back for freedom.

Now some argument…

Extremist leftist “Woke Progressivism” and “climate crisis” alarmism are related fronts of the same general push by elites, consciously intentional or not, to shape our liberal democratic societies into another collectivism. The elites actually running our governments (the “deep staters”), are pushing a fundamentally collectivist approach that undermines private property rights through big government, big taxation, and big regulation (see interview of Jon Moynihan below). Private property being the number one evil to liberate humanity from, according to Marx.

(“Intentional”? It could be devotion to socialism or some unformed embrace of “greater or common good” as ultimate goal, and not understanding that Classic Liberal protection of individual rights and freedoms has actually achieved more “greater or common good” over the past two centuries while collectivist/socialist approaches have consistently ruined greater or common good.)

Contemporary collectivist-oriented elites are being exposed for reshaping our liberal democratic societies through expanded government bureaucracies and state programs that are gradually replacing the private sector through a kind of “soft socialism” approach, that may not continue to remain “soft” much longer.

We get repeated intimations from elites that as they become aware that the pushback from populist revolts, agitating for restoration of basic equal rights and freedoms, may possibly be weakening their collectivist crusade, the elites are, in response, “doubling down” and may even be toying with resorting to the late-stage desperation phase of “exterminate or be exterminated”. See, for example, Matt Taibbi and Walter Kirn on the coming-out-of-the-closet validation of vigilante violence in mainstream media as Progressives become frustrated by the slow pace of democratic processes to bring the change that they want (i.e. notably, Taibbi and Kirn pointing to Joy Reid making this very argument recently on MSNBC).

(Note: On the shift to the extermination phase, Richard Landes in “Heaven On Earth” covers in detail the varied stages that totalitarian revolutions go through- i.e. Marxism, Nazism, environmental alarmism. Add Woke Progressivism to this list.) Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Stuff behind public debates on “this and that”

How to ruin a nation in 9 short years.

New below- Classic Liberalism is how we ensure that government “serves the people” and does not become the tool of elite domination. Also, “How to ruin a nation in 9 short years”. The Trudeau legacy by Matthew Lau.

Here is more on the proven best approach to organizing human societies- Classic Liberal principles, laws, representative institutions. Best, as in “doing the most good for the most people” (Milton Freidman). Best, as in protecting all of us from the true “enemy within”, as in our own personal impulses to tribalism, domination of others, and punitive destruction of differing others/”enemies”.

Marian Tupy and Jon Moynihan offer good commentary below on how Classic Liberalism works best to improve the human condition. We now have two centuries of evidence that illustrates the differing outcomes from Classic Liberalism and collectivist socialism. Some two centuries of evidence that affirms the critical role of freedom in the grand enterprise of improving life, meaning freedom from big government, freedom from high taxation, and most critically freedom from excessive regulations. In a word, freedom from socialism.

I will soon offer more on Mike Benz (Joe Rogan interview) exposing the corruption behind-the-scenes of our societies as state elites manipulate government bureaucracies and control information media (i.e. engage censorship projects) to propagandize citizens. As Jimmy Dore noted, “We are the most propagandized people, and we don’t know it”.

Benz is good on exposing the massive infrastructure of censorship that is used by state elites to maintain their power in the elite commoner/divide of our societies.

This below by Tupy and Moynihan shows how critical it is to re-educate each generation with the principles, laws, and representative institutions of Classic Liberalism, as contrasted with the destructiveness of freedom-denying collectivism/socialism. They explain why societies of free commoners/innovators produce better outcomes than elites controlling commoners through big states, big taxation, and more regulations. Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on How to ruin a nation in 9 short years.

“A happy New Year…. Without any fear”, John Lennon.

Intro comments before the Christmas message….

The “best” assembled in a new “populist” coalition, Wendell Krossa

A raft of the best of presidential candidates for the 2028 election have been brought together in a new populist coalition around Donald Trump. I would argue that no one, in the entirety of US history, appears better qualified of that bunch, than Vivek Ramaswamy. And hey, I can meddle a bit in your business down south because we are soon to become the 51st state. Yes, I get Trump was just kidding with Trudeau, or “bogarting” as a friend from Washington, DC used to call it. Meaning- “intimidate, bully, scare, browbeat” but in a fun sort of way. Keep doing it Donald. We love it.

I have two criteria to evaluate anyone potentially positioning themself to run for president of a large world economy, two critical requirements that make one suitable to manage an economy, requirements that are so calamitously absent from our PM Justin Trudeau.

Political candidates should preferably (1) have experience successfully running a business, understanding debt and cash flow issues, regulation and taxation issues as they impact the environment in which businesses can flourish, pricing and competition issues, and so on. And of course, how to pick and encourage skilled employees to perform at their best. Not being a “boss from hell”, the dictatorial type that ruins life for colleagues.

Business experience prepares candidates to understand the environment that is required for businesses to flourish. An environment that governments must promote, as Ben Carson outlined so well during his 2016 run. Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on “A happy New Year…. Without any fear”, John Lennon.