See new material below- “More on the freedom file”, comment on the two fundamental approaches to organizing human societies across history- collectivism versus free individuals. And some good points from Joe Rogan’s recent interview of Tim Dillon.
Don’t miss the National Post report on the threat the Muslim Brotherhood now poses to Canada as part of its grand worldwide program to “eliminate and destroy western civilization from within and ‘sabotage’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers (Muslims) so that it is eliminated and God’s religion (Islam) is made victorious over all other religions.”
As a British Muslim leader stated re Muslim migration to Western liberal democracies, “We are not here to take part but to take over”. He grinned as he stated that. This concerns current immigration issues and failed policies of multi-culturalism that do not ensure that migrants embrace liberal democracy values and practises.
Being aware of the ongoing assaults on our liberal democracies:
Some interesting polls on the majority of young voters leaning left/socialist now.
“Heartland/Rasmussen Poll: 53% of Young Voters Want a Socialist to Win the 2028 Presidential Election, 76% Want Government to Nationalize Major U.S. Industries”, Justin Haskins, Christopher Talgo, Sept. 4, 2025
Notes from article:
“53% of likely voters aged 18-39 said they would “like to see a democratic socialist candidate win the 2028 presidential election.”
“76% said they “somewhat” or “strongly” agree that “Major Industries like health care, energy, and big tech should be nationalized to give more control and equity to the people.”
And…
53% of likely voters under 40 want socialist for president in 2028: Rasmussen poll
48 percent of white voters, 64 percent of black voters, 62 percent of Hispanic voters, and 52 percent of other minority voters under 40 said they would want a socialist candidate to win.
Also…
“Socialism Is Resonating With America’s Youth”, The Heartland Institute, Sept. 5, 2025
Quotes:
“Despite its abysmal record of sowing poverty, misery, death, and envy in every place it has been implemented, socialism is gaining traction with young Americans.
“According to a new poll conducted by Rasmussen Reports and The Heartland Institute, more than half of likely voters age 18 to 39 “would like to see a democratic socialist win the 2028 presidential election.”
“Moreover, as the poll shows, nearly 80 percent of young likely voters think that ‘major industries like health care, energy, and big tech should be nationalized to give more control and equity to the people.’”
The author suggests the problem entails two parts, (1) the American education system has failed to teach students the truth of socialism’s horrific history (due to the domination of education by socialist educators) and (2) many youth today have not had great opportunities in a healthy free-market system.
(See full article at link above)
Grok, comment on these polls showing many young voters leaning far left now and the possible relation to “the long march through the institutions”.
“53% of likely voters under 40 want socialist for president in 2028: Rasmussen poll Provide evidence of the success of a long march through the institutions by socialism/Marxism?”
For example:
Grok’ response:
Verification of the Rasmussen Poll Claim
Yes, a recent Rasmussen Reports poll, conducted in partnership with the Heartland Institute, indicates that 53% of likely U.S. voters aged 18-39 would like to see a democratic socialist candidate win the 2028 presidential election. The survey, released around September 4, 2025, involved 2,500 likely voters and also found that 27% of this age group opposed the idea, while 20% were unsure. Additionally, 76% of these younger voters supported government nationalization of major U.S. industries, and 50% viewed socialism favorably overall.
This contrasts with older demographics, where support for socialism drops significantly—for instance, only 27% of voters aged 40-64 and 20% of those 65+ favor it. The poll has been widely discussed on platforms like X and conservative outlets, often linked to concerns about economic indicators and educational influences on younger generations. However, an earlier Rasmussen poll from May 2025 showed broader rejection of socialism, with 71% of all voters preferring a free-market economy, highlighting a generational divide.
Evidence of the Success of the “Long March Through the Institutions” by Socialism/Marxism
The “long march through the institutions” is a strategy attributed to Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci in the 1920s-1930s and popularized by German socialist activist Rudi Dutschke in 1967. It advocates for gradual infiltration and transformation of key societal institutions— such as education, media, government, and culture— to achieve socialist or Marxist goals without direct revolution, focusing on cultural hegemony rather than immediate economic upheaval.
Influenced by thinkers like Herbert Marcuse of the Frankfurt School, it emphasizes “entryism”—entering institutions to subvert them from within. Proponents and critics alike argue this approach has seen notable success, particularly in Western societies, by shifting cultural norms toward progressive, identity-based politics often labeled as “Cultural Marxism.” Below, I’ll outline evidence from a range of sources, including conservative critiques, historical analyses, and discussions on X, representing both supportive and skeptical viewpoints.
1. Historical and Theoretical Foundations and Claimed Successes
• Origins and Implementation: Gramsci’s ideas, developed during his imprisonment under Mussolini, emphasized a “war of position” to build counter-hegemony in civil society, contrasting with Leninist “war of maneuver.” By the 1960s, New Left figures like Dutschke adapted this for post-WWII Europe, targeting universities and media. Critics argue this “silent revolution” began even earlier, with Marxist influences in U.S. politics dating back to exchanges between Karl Marx and American figures in the 19th century, accelerating under FDR.
• Evidence of Institutional Capture: Sources claim success in education, where curricula in social sciences and humanities have shifted toward anti-capitalist, multicultural narratives, promoting victimhood and identity politics. For example, the Heritage Foundation highlights how Critical Theory (a neo-Marxist framework) has influenced U.S. policies on race, gender, and equity, leading to changes in corporate diversity programs and government initiatives. A 2022 Institute of Economic Affairs report describes this as a “long march” crystallizing in the 1960s but rooted in earlier socialist efforts, resulting in widespread adoption of progressive policies in Europe and the U.S.
2. Specific Examples of Alleged Success
• Education and Media: Conservative analyses point to the dominance of left-leaning ideologies in universities, where “bullying tactics” enforce dogmas, as noted in discussions of Marcuse and Foucault’s influence on viewing society through power dynamics. On X, users describe this as “institutional capture” via Cultural Marxism, turning proletarian-focused revolutions into cultural ones after realizing workers leaned conservative. Public schools are cited as “indoctrination centers” contributing to generational shifts, like the poll you mentioned.
• Politics and Culture: The strategy’s success is evident in the mainstreaming of identity politics (e.g., intersectionality in LGBTQ+ and racial justice movements), which some argue has captured corporations and governments, imposing “virtue signaling” and suppressing dissent. A 2023 New York Magazine piece notes how this narrative has even influenced right-wing theories, with figures like Christopher Rufo and Ron DeSantis framing it as leftist control over culture. X discussions highlight its “Achilles’ heel”—overreach making it appear as top-down imposition rather than grassroots.
• Broader Societal Shifts: Pro-Marxist historical examples, like the Paris Commune of 1871, are invoked as early inspirations, though its failure underscored the need for ruthless institutional control. Modern critiques, such as a 2020 American Mind article, argue the march began in the 1970s and has sold Marxism through combined cultural and economic lenses. However, setbacks are noted, like recent pushback against “woke” policies, suggesting the march has “tripped up” in areas like corporate backlash.
3. Counterarguments and Skepticism
• While many conservative sources celebrate the strategy’s success as a threat to liberty, others, like a Stack Exchange politics discussion, view it as more of a “permanent conflict” than total victory, with ongoing resistance. Progressive viewpoints often dismiss “Cultural Marxism” as a conspiracy theory, arguing changes stem from organic social progress rather than orchestrated Marxism. On X, some frame it as a long-term plan akin to George Soros’ influence, contrasting with violent revolutions.
Regarding the article you linked from the Hungarian Review (May 2020), it reviews Douglas Murray’s “The Madness of Crowds,” portraying the long march as a successful Gramscian tactic that has subverted institutions through identity politics, education, and media, leading to suppressed free speech and imposed dogmas on gender, race, and sexuality. It aligns with broader claims of cultural hegemony replacing economic Marxism.
Overall, evidence suggests the strategy has achieved partial success in reshaping cultural discourse, but its extent is debated, with biases evident in partisan sources—conservatives often amplify it as a dire threat, while left-leaning ones downplay it as myth.
(End of Grok’s comments)
More on the freedom file, Wendell Krossa
Historian Arthur Herman (“The Cave and the Light: Plato versus Aristotle and the struggle for the soul of Western civilization”), among others, traces the struggle across human history between the two basic approaches to organizing human societies- i.e. varied forms of collectivism where individuals are subjected to dominating/controlling elites (the “elite/commoner” divide of societies), versus the approach that elevates free and equal individuals and where state elites/bureaucrats actually “serve” the free and equal citizens.
That Jesus thing- “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve” (Matthew 20). Contrast this with Paul’s “Lord Jesus” mythology, rejecting the actual teaching of the wisdom sage Jesus to create a new archetype of domination and control. Add Paul’s statements on wives being subject to husbands, and slaves being subject to masters, as well as all citizens being subject to governments (Romans 13).
Other helpful histories of socialism/collectivism versus free individuals, are Joshua Muravchik’s “Heaven On Earth: The rise, fall, and afterlife of socialism”, Daniel Hannan’s “Inventing Freedom: How the English-speaking peoples made the modern world”, and Kristian Niemietz’s “Socialism: The failed idea that never dies”, etc.
The central issue in regard to socialism versus the free individual approaches to organizing human societies is the freedom and self-determination of the individual versus control by powerholding elites.
Socialism is fundamentally a form of collectivism where individuals are subjected to a collective that is framed/disguised in terms of an organizational approach for “greater or common good”. And the state elites running the collective claim that they do so “for the people, on behalf of the people”.
How has that worked out in all of the 24 socialist experiments around the world over the past century or so?
From Niemietz’s “Socialism: The Failed Idea That Never Dies”
“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.”
Exactly. When you centralize power in the state elites/bureaucrats who have to run the collective “on behalf of the people” that denies the freedom of choice to individuals. The counter to this deformity, and inevitable ruin of freedom, is to disperse power to citizens through liberal democracies that protect the rights and freedoms of all individuals, equally. This is accomplished with systems of common law and representative institutions where public bureaucrats are obligated to “serve the people” (individual free citizens) as sovereign.
Two critical policies in this regard are (1) decreased taxation (returning individual choice over income/assets to individuals) and (2) decreased regulation (returning choice in myriad areas- political/social- to individual citizens, less government intervention in individual’s lives).
As Niemietz details in his excellent “Socialism: The failed idea that never dies”, every socialist experiment promises to be the one that finally succeeds but then ends like all the previous others in totalitarianism disaster and ruin of societies. Note Venezuela that began with the Chavez promise to be different from past failures but followed the same old patterns.
After each successive failure socialists claim, “That was not true socialism. We need another one to show that it is the best way to organize society”. I heard my Marxist professors at Simon Fraser University say exactly this in the late 80s as the Soviet Union collapsed. And where are the collectivist zealots who ran down to Venezuela to praise Chavismo? Sean Penn, Oliver Stone, Naom Chomsky, Jimmy Carter, Kevin Spacey, etc.?
All now silent. After 24 repeated experiments over the past century or so. Who said what about doing the same thing again and again, after it fails each time?
As Niemietz notes, when socialists are asked what they would do differently the next time, they have no response because they will not/can not abandon the fundamental socialist principle/practise of centralizing power in the state elites who have to run the collective, “On behalf of the people”.
Individual citizens are inevitably denied individual freedoms and rights as they are subjected to the collective and its state elites.
It always reduces to the same old “elite/commoner” divide of societies.
Protected individual freedom and rights now have a proven history of unleashing human motivation to create products and services that vastly improve the human condition for all humanity, while also protecting nature. Set that history in comparison to the trail of ruin that inevitably results from socialist experiments.
Note: In “social democracy” or “democratic socialism” versions, any success stems from the democratic element, not from the socialist element in the mix. Socialist “nationalization” projects result inevitably in the ruin of societies (“Nationalization” is the process of transforming privately-owned assets into public assets, state appropriation of the “means of production”, taking ownership of businesses). Note, for example, Mitterrand’s coalition approach (socialists/Communists) that nationalized varied elements of French society when they took power in 1980, nationalization that tanked the French economy within the year. See details in Muravchik’s history of socialism.
Others have commented on the loosely affiliated Green/Red cooperation between Islamicists and Marxists, noting that neo-Marxists today have joined protests throughout the Western nations with Islamists who share the same end goal of the destruction of liberal democracy to be replaced by theocracy or by collectivist totalitarianism. Hence, the contemporary Russian/Iranian/Chinese military and economic cooperation. Also, the joining of forces in those Western anti-Semitism protests.
These apparently diverse state actors (Russia, China, Iran) are driven by the same dominant mythical theme of “salvation through destruction”.
This report on Iran’s long-term goal- Attacks in Australia illustrating the larger goal of the destruction of Western liberal democracy civilization.
“Iran’s proxy war on Jews is an all-out attack on Western civilization. Australia gets it: The fundamental bigotry that is Jew-hatred has not significantly changed over the millennia, but this manifestation wears a different face”, Victoria Coates, Sept. 7, 2025
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/irans-proxy-war-jews-attack-western-civilization-australia
Quotes:
The author notes that the Australian government has evidence “the Islamic Republican Guard Corps were behind domestic antisemitic incidents after the October 7, 2023, Hamas terrorist attacks on Israel.”
This evidence contradicts the mainstream media narrative that Oct. 7 was “desperate Palestinians radicalized by the Israeli occupation of their land.” If that narrative was true then, contends the Australian government, “why would the Iranian regime be trying to foment violence against Jews some 7,600 miles away?”
The author concludes the driving force behind Oct.7, along with protests and anti-Semitic attacks across Western liberal democracies, is the same old “fundamental bigotry of Jew-hatred” that has not changed across past millennia. It just puts on a different face today, that of the “anti-Western civilization” project.
“The goal of modern antisemitism is to eradicate Western civilization.”
The route to destroy Western civilization is moving through direct attacks to eliminate Israel (the “little Satan”), then attack the US (the “great Satan”), and then all of Western civilization. All represent “an insufferable blasphemy that cannot be accommodated or tolerated, but must be destroyed.”
The author argues that the current Iranian jihad is not about the Palestinians. “Their adherents are only “useful idiots” in the real battle to destroy the civilization that inspired all three countries (Australia, Israel, America). “
Coates notes that Western governments are trying to create moral equivalency between Israel and the Palestinians where Hamas is elevated to a negotiating partner and the central issue is the demand for a Palestinian state. She says this misses the real issue because “the Palestinians are not the point and never were. They are an Iranian vehicle to gain traction in the strongholds of the West — vibrant democracies such as America, Australia and Israel — and destroy them from within by encouraging the ancient hatred that is antisemitism.”
Black is not dark on Trump’s foibles, peccadilloes, and only has one minor quibble with the man, Wendell Krossa
The “quibble”? Black notes in the link below the “ego-centricity” of Trump, what some call “narcissism” (perhaps a bit too harsh?). I have always cringed at Donald Trump’s varied expressions of “petty vindictiveness”. That is not true of all his responses to critics, but only the odd time when some of his name-calling goes overboard, especially when he belittles the intelligence or looks of others (i.e. “ad hominem” attacks- an argument or reaction directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining).
That is simply unbecoming of someone who wants to be considered “great”. It’s an annoying stain on an otherwise admirable life of accomplishment and it diminishes this man of surprising common sense on so many critical business/economic issues that benefit both Americans and people worldwide. He is an undeniably smart man (also on social issues), something that opponents just cannot bring themselves to acknowledge as they nurse a stunning level of hatred for Trump that erupts in endless vilification to demonize and destroy the man.
Trump’s guiding ethic of retaliating with, not just “eye for eye” but 10 times as hard, does not help to solve disagreements and unify a tribally divided country.
I would add that this pointing out of fallibilities is not to pick on Trump as all of us suffer this same impulse to retaliate when offended and it renders all of us petty when we give vent to it in situations personal and small, or in larger public settings.
Others like Bill Maher note that there is a striking difference between Trump the private person and his “crazy” public presentation. Despite some apparent softening toward Trump, Maher continues to vent his own Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Others have also affirmed that in private Trump is courteous, generous, praises others, is warm and friendly, even self-deprecating at times, listens well, has a great sense of humor, exhibits real empathy with other’s suffering, is willing to learn, etc. Andrew Shulz asked him (pre-election interview): Why can’t you show your softer personal side publicly? Trump shrugged in response,” I don’t know?” Shulz was probing him on the point of- Why the public displays that seem so contrary to who you really are?
Note particularly the empathy of the man as he courageously tries to stop wars and end domestic violence at a scale few have ever done before.
Anyway, this from Black:
“The derangement over Trump marches on”, Conrad Black, Sept. 6, 2025
Quotes:
Black references the media commentator Andrew Coyne as an intelligent man but with the “mental affliction which is caused by the lawful elevation of Donald J. Trump to the office of President of the United States twice”. Black says that Coyne’s recent column in a Canadian newspaper is “demented rubbish”.
He quotes Coyne’s hysterical exaggeration of the imagined evil that is Trump, which mimics the same hysteria we see daily in US mainstream media. Coyne wrote that, “the dictatorship of Donald Trump is no longer a theoretical possibility or even a distant probability. It is an imminent reality… That Mr. Trump is bent on making himself dictator is no longer in doubt.”
As Black concludes re Coyne, “Almost every sentence is untrue, though Andrew, in his hatred of Trump, is in a delirium.”
He continues, contradicting Coyne’s assessment of Trump, stating, “I’ve known him (Trump) for many years, socially and as a business associate, I know him to be courteous, entertaining, and a loyal friend.”
However, Black acknowledges his quibble point, “I agree with Andrew and others that some manifestations of Trump’s egocentricity are unattractive, even in an office which requires anyone who aspires to it to have a mighty and indomitable ego.”
But his quibble does not diminish his recognition of the many good things that Trump has done for the US and the world.
“No one has ever been so severely and illegally obstructed as president and as a presidential candidate as he has, and he has become a considerable president in reorienting the country club Republican Party of the Bushes, McCain and Romney, to crack the Democratic fiefdoms of working class and ethnic minority votes, and in producing and broadening prosperity, shaping up the Western Alliance, ending the invasion of the United States by illegal immigrants, attacking the forces of wokeness in the universities, forcefully reducing crime rates, drastically reducing the fiscal and trade deficits, attracting in seven months nearly $15 trillion of new investment to the United States, destroying the Iranian nuclear military program and evicting men from girls’ sports and requiring mature approvals of trans-gender changes. This will not be undone by venomous and ignorant piffle from the media, especially the Trump-deranged and chronically bigoted Canadian media.”
He adds: “Trump has a clear mandate to deport illegal immigrants. Year by year, Trump has expelled far fewer than those deported by President Barack Obama.”
Further, Trump has accomplished all that Black lists above, against opposition that few others have had to endure.
“Trump has prevailed against overwhelming media opposition, was heavily outspent in last year’s election, faced utterly spurious indictments, and was even given insufficient security protection against potential assassins in his campaign.”
National Post
Some repeated material. Why? It is beyond critical to understanding and resolving varied issues today, like the recurrence of violence between groups/states.
Why the ongoing focus here on apocalyptic? Because it has been “the most violent and destructive idea in history” (Arthur Mendel). It drove (and still drives) the Marxism “apocalyptic millennial” crusade. It drove Nazism and now drives environmental alarmism, notably in its climate crisis version.
Apocalyptic continues to dominate human meta-narratives, both religious and secular. And look at Hollywood story-telling and the movie industry obsession with apocalypse.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_apocalyptic_films
Further, look at a generation of anxiety-ridden children whose minds have been abused and traumatised with “eco-anxiety”, having been told that the world is ending before they become adults.
Consider also the world’s number one illness- depression. Julian Simon (“Ultimate Resource”) had bought into environmental alarmism and was “clinically depressed” (his own words in his autobiography). Then he decided to look at the evidence on the state of the world for himself. After thoroughly researching the best data on all the major indicators of the world (i.e. forests, agricultural soils, ocean species, land species, etc.) he discovered that while there were still problems to solve everywhere, humanity was doing well in learning from past mistakes and now doing much better in caring for the natural world while also improving the human condition.
Simon discovered that life was not declining toward a worsening state but was improving over the long-term. Seeing the evidence for himself, Simon said that his depression left and never returned.
My point– The meta-narratives of our societies, both religious and secular, impact our personal consciousness and personal worldviews. Panicked alarmism shouted endlessly in public does impact citizens mental and emotional states. And nothing has been more destructive in this regard than the horrific fallacy of apocalyptic.
In terms of our Western civilization, this site traces the great lie of apocalyptic back to Paul’s apocalyptic Christ myth that embraced this psychopathology during the early formation of his “Christ-ianity”. Paul rejected the anti-apocalyptic message of Historical Jesus and re-created him as the ultimate expression of apocalyptic that would then subsequently dominate Western narratives and consciousness for the past two millennia.
“Historical Jesus was anti-apocalyptic”? Yes, his fundamental theology (his view of deity) was presented in the core statement of his message (a “Q Wisdom Sayings” message) in Luke 6:27-36, also Matthew 5:38-48.
He said (my paraphrase) “There must be no more ‘eye for eye’ retaliation against offenders but instead, ‘Love your enemies’ because God does. How so? God does not retaliate against God’s enemies but mercifully and generously gives the two basic gifts of life- i.e. sun and rain (the two critical natural elements for survival in agrarian societies)- to all alike, to both good and bad people. Be merciful just as God is merciful.”
He was stating the stunning new theology that God was an unconditional reality. That took love to its ultimate height of transcendent humaneness.
Historical Jesus presented a God who does not retaliate and who will not then engage the ultimate act of retaliation that is the apocalyptic destruction of the world to punish sinners (as portrayed, for example, in John’s Revelation). James Robinson has also stated this non-retaliatory theology of Jesus as “his greatest contribution to the history of human ideas… the stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God”.
Paul, two decades after Jesus’ death, then distorted the core message of that wisdom sage entirely by reframing him in terms of apocalyptic, as the returning Christ who in fiery retaliatory rage would destroy all who did not believe his Christ myth. Paul turned Jesus into the very opposite of what he had taught.
In his letters Paul presents his new messianic apocalyptic myth. He states that his God is, contrary to Jesus’ non-retaliatory God, a retaliatory deity burning with “wrath” at unbelievers.
Example from Romans 2: “Because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. God ‘will repay each person according to what they have done’”.
Then Romans 12: 17-20: “’Vengeance is mine. I will retaliate’, says the Lord”.
Paul’s Thessalonian letters: “They always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last. He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you… This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might.”
And Revelation 19: “I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a (rider on a horse who judges and wages war)… His eyes are like blazing fire… He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood… The armies of heaven were following him… Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. He will rule them with a rod of iron. He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.”
Note regarding the idea of a ”Lord” who rules with a rod of iron. Jesus had taught the opposite, stating that any who desired to be “great” (i.e. “God is great”) should not “lord over others” but should serve others.
On all the major themes of their messages, Paul rejected the wisdom teaching of Jesus and reframed him in terms of entirely opposite themes in his “Lord Christ” myth.
Further, read how Paul mocks and dismisses the wisdom tradition of Jesus in the Corinthian letters.
As James Tabor has said, the Jesus of history has been largely lost to Western consciousness while Paul’s opposite apocalyptic Christ has dominated Western narratives and consciousness.
James Tabor in “Paul and Jesus”:
“There was a version of ‘Christianity before Paul’, affirmed by both Jesus and his original followers, with tenets and affirmations quite opposite to these of Paul… 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 beyond the name Jesus itself” (p.xv1).
“Paul is the most influential person in human history and realize it or not, he has shaped practically all we think about everything… the West in particular… 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 been largely lost to our culture” (p. xv11).
“Paul operated with a strongly apocalyptic perspective that influenced all he said or did” (p.15).
“The entire New Testament canon is largely a post-Paul and pro-Paul production…” (p.19).
“The ‘Jesus’ who most influenced history was the ‘Jesus-Christ’ of Paul, not the historical figure of Jesus… Paul transformed Jesus himself (and) his message of a… kingdom of justice and peace on earth, to the symbol of a religion of otherworldly salvation in a heavenly world”, (21).
“The form of Christianity… (that thrived in the late Roman Empire)… was heavily based upon the ecstatic and visionary experiences of Paul. Christianity as we came to know it, is Paul and Paul is Christianity. The bulk of the New Testament is dominated by his theological vision”, p.24).
“Paul’s view of Christ as the divine pre-existent Son of God who took on human form, died on the cross for the sins of the world, and was resurrected to heavenly glory at God’s right hand, becomes the Christian message”, (39).
“The Q source is the earliest collection of the teachings and sayings of Jesus… the most striking characteristic of the Q source in terms of reconstructing Christian origins is that it has nothing of Paul’s theology, particularly his Christology or view of Christ”, (41).
The historical outcomes of the themes validated in Paul’s Christ myth?
Quotes from Zenon Lotufo’s book “Cruel God, Kind God”:
The Introduction states that, among others, “(Lotufo) explores the interface of psychology, religion, and spirituality at the operational level of daily human experience… (this is of the) highest urgency today when religious motivation seems to be playing an increasing role, constructively and destructively, in the arena of social ethics, national politics, and world affairs…”
My preface insert: The destructive outcomes of “religious motivation” are notable also in terms of the “profoundly religious” climate alarmism crusade and its destructive “salvation” scheme of Net Zero decarbonization (“save the world”), as evident in the spreading harm, from Net Zero and renewables zealotry, in societies like Germany, Britain, and California. Climate alarmism exhibits the same old themes and destructive outcomes of all past apocalyptic crusades. The themes of climate alarmism, as another apocalyptic millennial crusade, are energized by the cohering center of an angry deity threatening harsh punishment and destruction through an apocalypse.
Lotufo then proceeds to detail “the pathological nature of mainstream orthodox theology and popular religious ideation”.
He says, “One type of religiosity is entirely built around the assumption or basic belief, and correspondent fear, that God is cruel or even sadistic… The associated metaphors to this image are ‘monarch’ and ‘judge’. Its distinctive doctrine is ‘penal satisfaction’. I call it ‘Cruel God Christianity’… Its consequences are fear, guilt, shame, and impoverished personalities. All these things are fully coherent with and dependent on a cruel and vengeful God image…
“(This image results) in the inhibition of the full development of personality… The doctrine of penal satisfaction implies an image of God as wrathful and vengeful, resulting in exposing God’s followers to guilt, shame, and resentment… These ideas permeate Western culture and inevitably influence those who live in this culture…
“Beliefs do exert much more influence over our lives than simple ideas… ideas can also, in the psychological sphere, generate ‘dynamis’, or mobilize energy… (they) may result, for instance, in fanaticism and violence, or… may also produce anxiety and inhibitions that hinder the full manifestation of the capacities of a person…
“The image of God can be seen as a basic belief or scheme, and as such it is never questioned…
“Basic cultural beliefs are so important, especially in a dominant widespread culture, because they have the same properties as individual basic beliefs, that is, they are not perceived as questionable. The reader may object that “God”, considered a basic belief in our culture, is rejected or questioned by a large number of people today. Yet the fact is that the idea of God that those people reject is almost never questioned. In other words, their critique assumes there is no alternative way of conceiving God except the one that they perceive through the lens of their culture. So, taking into account the kind of image of God that prevails in Western culture- a ‘monster God’… such rejection is understandable…
“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’”.
My conclusion from these comments by Tabor, Ellens, and Lotufo:
We wonder why we have just suffered through one of history’s most violent centuries. And the violence driven by apocalyptic pathology continues (ISIS-type eruptions, Marxist endless re-emergence in new iterations, apocalyptic climate hysteria and Net Zero decarbonization madness, etc.).
This contemporary madness that results in mass-death outcomes is incited by the images, archetypes, ideas/ideals/beliefs that make up our worldviews, our narratives both personal and public meta-narratives. And none are more destructive than the fear generated by apocalyptic scenarios. That fear of “the end of life/the world” incites irrational fear and the survival impulse in populations. Alarmed people are then susceptible to wacky salvation schemes (i.e. “save the world”, even “salvation through destruction” of their own societies).
Added note:
It is impossible not to be influenced by apocalyptic madness when it is shoved daily into our faces by climate alarmism over every natural twitch in nature. We also get apocalyptic haranguing from resurging Marxism in new iterations like Woke Progressivism with DEI. That promotes tribal dualism now based on woke racism as the new discrimination (i.e. with skin color as the new divide between categories of “oppressor/oppressed”).
And we get apocalyptic propaganda from Hollywood’s obsession with apocalyptic as our indisputable future reality (i.e. life declining toward something worse, toward apocalyptic ending). We are daily inundated with this madness constantly ratchetted to hysterical levels.
(Note: The influence of the message of Historical Jesus is present in the Christian tradition and has helped to moderate the more violent impulses that have been incited by the dominant themes from Paul’s Christ myth over past centuries.)
Rogan and Dillon- News fused with comedy
“Joe Rogan Experience #2375 – Tim Dillon”, Powerful JRE, Sept. 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB8BcRimf78
Dillon nails it that the Graham Linehan arrest in England, for his tweets, sends the message that you can’t hold or express opinions that counter to the governing elite’s positions which have become “Far-left Woke Progressivism with the tribal dualism of neo-collectivist DEI”. This is the new totalitarianism that will not permit counter opinion to its narrative. This new collectivism now criminalizes and imprisons dissenters as we are now seeing in Germany and France. It criminalizes opposition candidates and parties (and populism in general) after smearing them as evil “Far-Right” extremists- i.e. “Fascists, Nazis, racists, transphobes, etc.”
Woke Progressivism presents as virtue signaling for oppressed minorities and pushes such things as online harm bills to protect children, and protecting trans people against “hate speech” (all fine and good), but with unclear boundaries that permit political parties to censor and ban opposition as representing “dangerous disinformation, hate speech, ‘speech as violence’, etc.” Add “concept creep” that permits political opponents to stretch definitions and boundaries as they indulge their tribal and totalitarian impulses against “evil enemies”. Canada also has a similar bill awaiting approval.
Rogan and Dillon move on…
Their discussion prompted this line of thought- Some mulling on escapism as escape from this fallen corrupt world. Arthur Mendel and others note this element of belief came out of Hellenism, notably Neo-Platonism and Gnosticism, the idea that this world was so corrupt that it must be abandoned, it must be escaped from. Hellenists and Gnostics believed that we are imprisoned here in corrupted bodies that stifle our pure spirits and we need to escape to a perfect realm of “Ideals/Ideas/Forms” and abandon this world that is not worth salvaging.
Whereas in early Jewish thought and religion the belief was that God had purposely created this world imperfect as a realm for human struggle and learning to create something better. Humanity was put here to finish God’s creation, to learn and develop toward mature humanity through struggle with problems/imperfection in the natural world and with imperfection in humanity. Through such struggle we would learn to rationally solve problems and to create something better, to create the “good society” of ever-improving human civilization.
And we have succeeded wildly in gradually accomplishing this project across our history, notably in developing toward liberal democracy. Add the evidence of our improvement across history in the fact that we (humanity) are much less violent today than in our primitive past. This has been accomplished through such factors as “the moralizing influence of gentle commerce”, through which we have learned to cooperate peacefully in order to mutually benefit one another.
In liberal democracy we are learning to overcome our inherited animal impulses to tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction of one another.
Problems and struggle have been critical to our development and learning as expressed in the hero’s quest where we go out into life to fight a monster/enemy, one that resides mostly inside each of us, the real battle against the real enemy in life that is our animal inheritance of impulses to exclusionary tribalism, alpha domination and control of one another, and then “justice” as punitive destruction of one another.
In our struggle with problems/imperfections we learn insights, and we even become wounded, but then we find answers/solutions to benefit others. We emerge to “tower in stature as maturely human”, notably we mature most profoundly by grasping the central ideal of unconditional as the highest form of love, expressed in “love of enemies”, and exhibited in restorative justice approaches to the failures of others.
And just to insert this good one from a Roman Stoic philosopher of 2000 years ago. It has to do with ending eye for eye cycles of retaliation that render us all petty and animal-like. Musonius Rufus said, “To bite back the biter is animal, and not human” (something to that effect).
Continuing with the escapism from this world to some utopian other realm:
Bob Brinsmead has consistently argued for fully embracing this life, not seeking escape from this world and life, but to embrace it fully while we are here as its all that we know, all that we have been shown with our brains limiting our perception to 5 senses and 3 or 4 realms. Bob states that this life was the focus of Historical Jesus with his emphasis on love in human relationships in this world, in the mundane and ordinary of daily life- i.e. feeding the hungry, a glass of water for the thirsty, helping, serving, healing, encouraging, and mercifully forgiving failing others around us.
Then Paul deformed the focus of Jesus entirely, shifting human concern away from improving life in this world, to focusing on otherworldly concerns. He did this by creating his Christ myth with its intense focus on escaping this evil world to find salvation in an invisible heaven. He created a gospel that focused on salvation into an otherworldly paradise, hence his advice to his converts to not marry as that would detract from spreading his gospel and converting others to the same focus that would deny this world for otherworldly salvation.
So also, the secular variants of this same mythology- e.g. Marxist apocalyptic millennialism- are oriented to escape this evil civilization for some communal utopia.
Dillon also points out this escapism in relation Hollywood trying to escape aging and death with plastic surgery that leaves people unrecognizable compared to their earlier selves. Dillon references “the Denial of Death” as in denying the natural role of death in life. Among varied functions, death serves to limit the lifespans of older generations so upcoming generations may get their opportunities to come into the world and improve life.
Point- While here, engage life fully and make some unique contribution to the overall improvement of the world and don’t waste time focused on forms of irresponsible escapism. And yes, I would distinguish irresponsible escapism from varied less harmful forms of escapism that we all enjoy to break monotony in daily life.
Note: Is Musk’s Mars project embracing some form of this escapism? The apocalyptic alarmist view that this world is hopelessly defiled so to get ready to leave, to abandon this planet?
Note: I am not with these two (Rogan and Dillon) as they wander off into coming apocalypse nonsense. Beware of what Mendel calls the “self-fulfilling” influence of that pathology.
And then this from National Post that points to what has gone wrong with current immigration to Western liberal democracies and multi-culturalism processes that do not obligate immigrants to embrace Classic Liberal principles, systems of common law, and representative institutions that protect the rights and freedoms of all individuals, equally.
As a Muslim leader in Britain said, grinning, “We are not here to take part and assimilate but to take over”. That is immigration/multiculturalism gone wrong in that it does not obligate newcomers to embrace liberal democracy values as fundamental to becoming members of Western societies, liberal democracy being the one thing that unites all humanity most peaceably. Many now migrate to Western liberal democracies who hate such societies, and seek to destroy them, even though they prefer to live in and enjoy the benefits of such societies, compared to their own.
The toleration of multi-culturalism is no noble feature to virtue signal over, if it tolerates intolerance from others. As Joe Rogan says in his latest interview of Tim Dillon, there is no allowance for dissent in Islam.
The more prominent crusades today that are devoted to the project of destroying Western liberal democracies- i.e. Marxist collectivism and Islamicist theocracy, along with varied other similar crusades (i.e. environmental alarmism).
And do I have to remind anyone that this Islamicist movement is profoundly apocalyptic millennial in nature? I argue here that it is more critical (than the suggested actions at the bottom of this article to counter the Islamicist threat) to go to the core ideas that drive such destructive crusades. Most critical of all- Go after the theology that centers these apocalyptic millennial narratives, the theology of a tribal, dominating, and punitively destroying God that is common to all our major religions and their secular variants like Marxism and environmentalism.
This is a major theme of this site that touches base repeatedly with the entirely opposite theologies of Historical Jesus and Paul’s Christ myth.
Further note:
This form of extremism does not represent the entire Muslim population but is a significant element in that religion.
“Opinion: The Muslim Brotherhood poses an insidious threat to Canadian society: A new report shows why Ottawa must start taking the danger posed by the global jihadist movement seriously”, Joe Adam George, Dagny Pawlak, Sept. 8, 2025
The authors begin with this statement that formed part of a 1991 “memo that outlined the Muslim Brotherhood’s plans to conquer North America: ‘The Ikhwan (Arabic for “brethren”) must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers (Muslims) so that it is eliminated and God’s religion (Islam) is made victorious over all other religions.’”
They note recent reports that reveal the Muslim Brotherhood’s presence and influence throughout Canadian society. They state that, “The Muslim Brotherhood is a transnational Sunni Islamist movement that’s committed to creating a global caliphate based on the principles of Sharia law. It is widely considered to be the most influential and largest Islamist group in modern history.”
And they add this: “The Brotherhood engages in both violent and non-violent forms of jihad to achieve its ultimate aim of Islamist supremacy, a goal clearly articulated by its Egyptian founder Hassan al-Banna, who stated: ‘It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet’.”
The authors continue, noting that the Muslim Brotherhood is a main sponsor of Islamic terrorism across the world today… “the world’s most dangerous militant cult.”
And then this interesting bit on the narrative propaganda done by the Brotherhood, according to Gilles Kepel, “The term ‘Islamophobia’ was first popularized by the Brotherhood as a way to delegitimize criticism of its Islamist ideology by equating it with antisemitism. This deceptive comparison, Kepel asserts, enables the Muslim Brotherhood to claim moral high ground through perceived victimhood and to redirect that sentiment against Israel and Zionism.”
Further, the authors state that the Brotherhood is trying to achieve its goal of domination through “gradual societal transformation” to eventually conquer the entire Western world. The Brotherhood is able to accomplish its goal due to the permissive environment of societies like Canada that are subjected to wokeism, weak multiculturalism, overwhelming immigration levels, and other weaknesses.
The authors state that the Brotherhood’s activities are spreading and are evident in the increasing antisemitism, youth radicalization, and terrorism charges as they “penetrate and manipulate Canadian society and institutions.”
Then this blunt summary conclusion of the Muslim Brotherhood: “Its Islamist ideology promotes visceral hatred and rejects liberal democratic values. When Brotherhood-linked groups gain legitimacy within western societies, they perpetuate a corrosive worldview that undermines social cohesion and foments division and radicalization.”
National Post
Joe Adam George is a national security analyst at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and Canada research lead for Islamist threats at the Middle East Forum. Dagny Pawlak is a senior communications officer at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.
Note on the uncontrolled immigration of past years:
Why have leftist parties in Western democracies allowed uncontrolled immigration? Gad Saad offers some of the best insight on this. He says that it is driven by “suicidal empathy” and others note that it is about virtue signalling for status in society as compassionate and morally superior. “Suicidal empathy” enacts policies like de-carceration of violent offenders and denies the horrific outcomes against innocent citizens. It is an abandonment of common sense and the fundamental responsibility to protect citizens from assault. These “suicidal empathy” policies, pushed by leftist political parties, have spread across Western liberal democracies.