‘We are not God. We are not even good idols’
– Reinhold Niebuhr [i]
[i] Niebuhr, R. 1945 ‘Today, Tomorrow & The Eternal’ in Discerning the Signs of the Times :Sermon Essays
Under current defamation law, social media users can be held legally responsible for third-party content on any post they make.
The guiding rule seems to be: You posted it. You incited it. Ergo, you’re responsible for it.
In other words, anything someone posts on my timeline or writes in the comments section, that is deemed offensive, defamatory or “hate speech” could end in a lawsuit.
For those who only have a private Facebook account, there is currently no mechanic to prevent this from happening. The only real preventative measure is to keep an eye on comments or keep your friends and comments list small, simple and drama free.
For those who choose to have a public Facebook page, there are two ways to solve the problem before it becomes one. First, Facebook’s mechanism for pages allows content providers to filter (block) certain words. The second way is to have dedicated moderators screen every comment.
Anti-defamation and anti-discrimination laws are great servants, as long as they remain a shield. However, these laws make for a terrible sword in the hands of an opportunist who views everyone not in agreement with them as a traitor, hater or “literal Nazi”.
Defamation laws weren’t written with social media in mind. David Rolph, professor of law at UNSW, highlighted this in his piece for Sydney Morning Herald, where he advocated reform, stating that ‘the last consideration of defamation law by the Australian Law Reform Commission was almost 40 years ago, decades before the advent of the internet.’ (SMH, 2018)
Rolph also mentioned the need to ensure a balance between upholding freedom of speech, and policing false speech; ensuring that people don’t have their reputations unfairly damaged, and can find ‘effective redress, through last resort financial compensation, or more easier remedies of retractions, corrections, and take-down orders’ for online content that is clearly false or blatantly misleading.
The Australian took to an editorial last week to call upon the government to ‘overhaul defamation laws’ after a recent supreme court ruling looks set to establish a precedent, making ‘media companies legally responsible for comments made by other people on the company’s social media pages.
In essence, companies with a public Facebook page are liable for third-party content on their pages. The editorial noted, however, that ‘moderating, blocking or hiding comments, is untenable because of the volume of material that works its way through pubic pages, and the amount of resources it would take to do so; and even though Facebook hasn’t provided a mechanic which allows for comments to be turned off, Facebook isn’t held responsible.’ (The Australian, 2019)
In a recent case related to this, conservative Facebook page, Political Posting Mumma, administrated by mum of four, Marijke Rancie, was sued and pressured into agreeing to a large financial settlement out of court, because of third party content on her Facebook page.
While some third party comments were obviously wrong, and defamatory, Marijke’s original post and comment wasn’t intended to be so. Despite this, and the fact that Facebook doesn’t have a disable comments section, Marijke was, under current defamation law, considered liable for the comments made by others on her Facebook page.
This was confirmed twice by BuzzFeed who cited the plaintiff, Adele Moleta, saying that ‘she was defamed by multiple (200) comments on the post and that Marijke is, for legal purposes, the publisher of those comments’. (BuzzFeed, 2018)
In a disproportionate response, apparently designed to intimidate Marijke, Moleta was backed up by a ‘lawyer on a no-win, no-fee basis, and two pro-bono barristers, one of whom is a QC’ to fight her case against Marijke.
Those looking to make an example of Marijke, because of her outspoken “no” against Same-sex marriage, concerns about the ‘Safe Schools’ program, and concerns about teaching LGBT ideology being given centre stage in schools, found a reason, under current defamation laws concerning third-party content, to do so.
It’s worth noting that while BuzzFeed acknowledges the alleged pain and suffering caused to Moleta by Marijke, BuzzFeed has, since December 2018, posted four articles by Sainty Lane, revisiting the cause of that alleged pain and suffering in minute detail.
Lane also published an article this week discussing the need to vet comments, referring to the same court ruling as the editorial from the Australian.
Lane confirms the problem of defamation laws and third party content, yet gives no mention of the case against Marijke. Even though, Marjike was sued under the premise that her Facebook page was a media company.
Lane also acknowledged the difficulty in policing third party comments, stating that there is ‘no official way to turn off comments’ [i] on Facebook, citing solicitor, Hannah Marhsall as saying “I feel like the legal system and the internet are on this collision path. And what’s going to happen next is really hard to figure.” (BuzzFeed, 2019)
One of the biggest challenges to any reform of defamation law is the contentious term, “hate speech”. This is broadly defined by Facebook as anything that is
‘a direct attack on people based on what we call protected characteristics — race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, caste, sex, gender, gender identity, and serious disease or disability. We also provide some protections for immigration status. We define attack as violent or dehumanizing speech, statements of inferiority, or calls for exclusion or segregation.’ (FB, 2019)
Facebook provides no explanation of the latter, and seems to be content with filing it in under the banner of “hate speech”.
Social media companies appear vague and unconcerned about users being sued for defamation because of third party comments made on their own social media posts. These companies also appear to be aloof when providing an objective rounded definition of what ‘dehumanizing speech’, ‘statements of inferiority’, ‘calls for exclusion’, or ‘segregation’ are.
If dehumanizing speech is “hate speech”, why hasn’t Facebook addressed Leftists who use pejorative terms for Christians on their platform? Why does Facebook allow comments that falsely equate Donald Trump with Hitler, or falsely equate any person who gives Trump a cautious “yes”, a Nazi, homophobe, Islamophobe or racist?
And as Republican Senator, Dan Crenshaw said to Google this week, ‘we fought the Nazis. It makes sense to conclude that by you calling a person a Nazi, you’re inciting violence against them.’
Though the term is widespread, no one really seems to know what “hate speech” actually is; it’s as vague and asinine as the phrases “woke”, and “love is love”. [ii]
From Marijke’s example, The Australian, and BuzzFeed’s Saintly Lane’s own observations, it’s easy to see how ambiguous terms like “hate speech”, and unreformed, complex defamation laws, could be used to the advantage of anyone wanting to justify forcing conservatives and Christians out of the public sphere. These could also be used to the advantage of anyone wanting to punish Christians because of perceived wrongs, or because the Spirit and Truth that Christians uphold, does not align with whatever, and whomever, the zeitgeist (spirit of the age) tell us all to worship.
Some LGBT lobby groups already police speech, seeking to punish people for using “incorrect” gender pronouns or for misgendering someone who identifies as LGBT. With the large amount of resources and financial backing for LGBT lobby groups, it would be naïve to think that surveillance of high profile Christians and conservatives on social media doesn’t happen.
Chris Tomlinson, from Brietbart, reported a case this week, where a 52 year old Swedish man, who was an administrator for Facebook group, ‘Stand up for Sweden’, was convicted of “hate” comments made by other Facebook users. The page was reported to police by an ‘online social justice activist group, called Näthatsgranskaren, which has been touted as being responsible for a rise in investigations and prosecutions for online hate speech in Sweden.’ (Breitbart, 2019)
Dialogue is the higher ground in conflict resolution. Lawsuits are a last resort. No one should be bullied, sued or intimidated for speaking truth in love, or be reprimanded and silenced for sharing their faith. Nor should they be punished for providing fair criticism, or for sharing their concerns about socio-political issues with others online.
Continue to speak boldly, and with grace, but until defamation laws have been reformed, and until Social Media companies improve their user interfaces, vet comments because if third party content can and be used against you, it will be.
Rolph, D. 2018. Australia’s defamation laws are ripe for overhaul, Sydney Morning Herald, 9th Dec. 2018 Sourced, 2nd July, 2019
Sainty, L. 2018. One of the faces of the SSM “no” campaign is being sued over a Facebook post, BuzzFeed 20th December, 2018. Sourced 2nd July, 2019.
Saintly, L. 2019. How a Queer woman took on a prominent conservative activist and won $100,000, BuzzFeed, 18th June, 2019. Sourced, 2nd July, 2019.
Saintly, L. 2019. “Political Posting Mumma” has issued a rare apology over comments on one of her Facebook posts, BuzzFeed 24th January, 2019. Sourced 2nd July, 2019.
Saintly, L. 2019. The Woman behind “PPM” has Apologised after being sued over a Facebook Post, BuzzFeed, 4th June, 2019. Sourced, 2nd July, 2019.
Saintly, L. 2019. This Court ruling on Facebook comments is a huge headache for the Media, BuzzFeed, 28th June, 2019. Sourced 2nd July 2019.
Tomlinson, C. 2019. Swedish Man Convicted of hate comments he did not make, 28th June, 2019. Sourced, 2nd July 2019.
[i] The Facebook mechanic for pages is useful, but their user interface is ultimately useless to anyone looking to moderate a page by themselves. Comments are piled into one notification, and each individual comment has to be viewed in order to see them. If you have 100 plus comments every post, it’s the equivalent of a fulltime job just to keep up. Even turning comments off, if that function was available would cause problems. This is because comments are an important part of the Facebook algorithm when it comes to bumping posts on newsfeeds.
[ii] Back in February, a 70 year old Swedish man was charged with “hate speech” for posting on Facebook that “Somalis are lazy”.
Originally posted on The Caldron Pool, 3rd July, 2019.
©Rod Lampard, 2019
Advocates for Julian Assange are calling on President Donald Trump to pardon the besieged Wikileaks founder before Assange-hating Leftists are inaugurated back into the White House in January.
The Wikileaks founder is facing extradition from Britain and over 100 years in prison for playing a role in publishing compromising Pentagon documents on [the Deep State’s – as some would argue] ‘misconduct’ during the war in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2010 and 2011. (Swedish rape charges brought against Assange in 2017 were dropped in 2019 due to ‘a weakening of evidence.’)
Assange is disliked by career politicians on both sides of the political aisle.
None so vengeful as The Democrats because Wikileaks published Clinton campaign emails during the 2016 election, which is said to have won Donald Trump the unwinnable election.
Meeting with Assange in February this year, Senator Andrew Wilkie and M.P George Christensen, dubbed by the ABC’s Fran Kelly as an ‘odd couple’, have been spear heading a high-level political advocacy group in favour of Assange’s release.
Wilkie, himself a “whistleblower” (knighted as such by veteran journalist, Laurie Oakes, legacy media and academia), was a Government analyst who resigned, and publicly challenged the legitimate allegations about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
For Wilkie, Assange is innocent.
The charges in the U.S are based on allegations which claim that Wikileaks endangered Americans. However, “no one has been able to point to where National Security was compromised, hurt or put a risk by Wikileaks.”
In regards to the Clintons, Wilkie said, “I don’t like Trump, and would have preferred Hillary win, but if we are to really argue that Wikileaks is a journalistic organisation, [we have to look at whether or not they] released material without fear or favour.”
Wilkie told Fran Kelly, Assange “did the right thing” by acting in the “public interest.”
Wilkie and Christensen’s 11 member, Bring Julian Assange Home Parliamentary Friends Group was formally approved by both the Australian Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives in October 2019.
According to a February 2020 article in the Sydney Morning Herald, ‘apart from Mr Christensen [the case to free Assange] has no other government members. Both the Coalition and Labor have been reluctant to voice public support for the Australian activist.’
In consideration of the gathering shadows drooling with anticipation at an approaching Biden presidency, Christensen has stepped up his advocacy for Assange by publicly asking President Donald Trump to pardon Assange.
Posting on Facebook, George Christensen upped the ante:
‘How to annoy Killary.
2. Send a message to Donald J. Trump
asking him to pardon Julian Assange.
3. Remember that Jeffery Epstein didn’t kill himself.‘
In an exclusive for Sky News, Christensen explained,
“Assange has been a target of the Democrats. You hear a lot of lefties suggesting this is Donald Trump’s war on Assange. It’s anything but. It was started under the Obama administration. Hillary Clinton hates his guts obviously for exposing who the real Hillary was. You’ve had a war on Assange by the Democrats and the Deep State ever since. Joe Biden called Assange a criminal, a high-tech terrorist. [Pardoning Assange] is one way that Donald Trump can stand up for free speech. He’s been a big fighter on that his whole presidency, and against the Cancel Culture ideology of the Left. I think this is one way he can stand up once again and show that he is that defender of freedom of speech.”
Citing well-reasoned broad concerns about voting irregularities, and evidence of electoral fraud, he added,
“…the same people who’ve wanted Trump our of office, are the same people who’ve waged war on Julian Assange. They want to lock him up to rot in a gaol cell. [Pardoning Assange] is way that Trump can ensure that free speech is protected.”
It might not be a matter of will Donald Trump pardon Julian Assange, but a matter of does he have the time to do so.
After the November election saw the Democrats take power through questionable means in four key states, Trump has had his hands full trying to preserve the Union alongside states who upheld their end of the constitution.
As noted by Fran Kelly, not everyone agrees that Assange should be acquitted on the grounds of freedom of the press and freedom of speech.
Wikileaks pioneered replacement media and were first on the field in the fight for truth against falsehood, and they’re hounded by Cancel Culture, and a political class whose wealth and dynasties are built on the backs of tax payers, smiles, lies and hi-fives.
If the hate-Trump/loves-trumps-hate, anti-Assange Democrats get their way, as four years of division, violence and threats of revolution seem to have afforded them, like a large portion of America and the free world, Trump may be Assange’s last hope in securing freedom.
You can send a resolute message to the political class and legacy media by clicking here to sign George Christensen’s petition asking for President Donald Trump to pardon Julian Assange.
First published on Caldron Pool, 14th December, 2020.
©Rod Lampard, 2020.
Guest post by Josiah Luithui.
Christianity came to Nagalim about 100 years ago, and now 99% of the population in Nagalim is Christian. Then, we can be sure about this – Christmas is the most awaited and important festival of Nagalim.
It is the festival of joy and merry-making; a joy for the birth of baby Jesu and a merry-making of this joy. It is a season of rest and fellowship and gathering; a season when dear and near ones comes home from afar to be with their parents and family at home. It is the most precious festival for the Nagas.
In this festive season farmers take complete rest from farm works; students comes home from their schools/colleges/seminaries, and villages are once again full of merry-making voice and gathering. So, for the tribal Nagas who mostly dwells in villages, Christmas is the most wonderful and beautiful festival and time God has made for His people.
Let me tell you about how Christmas is celebrated in Nagalim.
Usually, the celebration stresses for 4-5 days, i.e., starting from 24th December mid-night program (this is to welcome the birth of baby Jesus at mid-night) and the celebration goes till the 28th night. People gather in a place, usually the village football playground.
At night, since the weather is cold, people gather seating around the fire.
At 24th, mid-night, the whole gathering crowd goes for Christmas Carol, and at 1 am they will move out from the place where they are gathered. They are led by the village Torch bearer, followed by the Church choir master with his choir, and followed by the crowed. They will sing the Hymn songs and go door-to-door collecting the carol gifts. All these gifts they collected are done for auction in the Church after Christmas, and the fund is for the Church.
During day time, people gather from 10 am- 4 pm, they play different games and are rewarded with prizes- pen, cup, plate, exercise books, utensils etc. The games are usually played categorically, i.e., children, adult and old folks; also men and women.
Common games played are: race, volleyball and football. Nagas, both men and women, are football lovers. The program begins and ends with prayer; before the departure of the day, a very special kind of “delicious sweet” is distributed to the crowed, one piece each- called “Genikur,” which is made of sugar-cane juice- an apple size.
At night, people gather around the fire and there is competition: song, dance and drama, fashion show etc. The winners are rewards with prizes. The night program is from 7 pm- 10 pm. The program begins and ends with prayer and the delicious “Genikur.”
The most delicious and choice food for Christmas is “Pork.” Poor people buy 2/3 kgs for the festival; but this does not stop them from the joy of receiving baby Jesus. And, especially for children, Christmas is the time when they buy new: toy guns, barbies, and dress.
This is the time the parents spend their saving for children’s clothing.
To sum up, for the Nagas, Christmas is the one all-in-all celebration; a celebration of joy and merry-making, singing “joy to the world, the Savior Jesus is born.” Amen.
Josiah is a student of theology.
Servant of the living Lord Jesus Christ.
To learn more about Nagalim,
you can connect with Josiah @ the Facebook page Council of Nagalim Churches
Orchestrated by socio-political heavy weights such as Lord Kitchener, and younger politicians like Winston Churchill. Commonwealth soldiers landed in the beach assault on Gallipoli and other areas of the peninsula, in April, 1915. These included soldiers from Britain, India, Australia and New Zealand.
Though debate still continues, The Dardanelles Strait campaign ended in more of a stalemate than defeat.
It was ultimately deemed a failure, due, according to Lloyd George, ‘not so much [the younger] Winston Churchill’s haste as to Lord Kitchener’s and [the then British Prime Minister] Herbert Asquith’s procrastination.’ [i]
Among other things, the joint Australian and New Zealand commemoration of ANZAC day provides an opportunity to reflect on the cost of war, freedom and the importance of our gratitude; that our collective “thank you” is collectively acknowledged; lived and breathed, not just superficially spoken.
Just as importantly, the day also provides an opportunity to talk about the violent persecution of the Armenians; a persecution carried out by some of the louder political factions within the politically unstable Ottoman Empire during this period.
The Armenians were Christians. They were considered more Westernised than their Muslim neighbours and as a result were looked upon with suspicion by the hostile factions.
The Armenian people looked for independence from Turkey, but were yet to be represented by any organised governmental body.
This was unlike Turkey, Australia and New Zealand, who, being represented as a nation in the battle for the Gallipoli Peninsula, had been considered to have come of age .
Alan Moorehead rightly noted that the success of the Turkish Army had become a political success.
‘They saw themselves as standing for the Turk, and for Islam. So, in elation, they set about hunting down their racial and political opponents (which was nothing new in the East or everywhere else for that matter). Success against the allied assault had expedited the persecution and slaughter of Armenians. It would be absurd, however, to argue that the Allies’ failure in the Dardanelles was the only cause of this, since the root instinct to destroy the unprotected, Christian, Armenian minority was always there. Before March there were about two million Armenians in Turkey, and it was the young Turks’ intention to exterminate or deport them all. This task, however, was never completed; barely three-quarters of a million were dead or dying by the time the frantic rage of their tormentors had exhausted itself.’
The point of ANZAC day is first found in an ode near to its heart:
‘…At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.’
(The Ode, from For The Fallen, Robert Laurence Binyon, 1869-1943 )
We are in need of ANZAC day. Though body and memory fade, the act of being remembered transcends time. Placing us in the humble position of being reminded that ‘we are not God. That we aren’t even good idols.’ [iii]
Because of the gravity of it, our corporate, individual and collective arrogance is challenged; And we are met face to face with the enormity of the task before us. A task of vigilance that requires us to make every effort to protect and seek, peace and good will, among societies and nations.
Standing with those who care to uphold it, and are willing to share in bearing both its burdens and its blessings.
Standing in responsible disagreement against those who would seek to do the opposite.
Perhaps at the core of how important ANZAC day is, is that we as a society, are ourselves, confronted with the brutal fact, that a history too easily forgotten is a history too easily repeated.
[i] Moorehead, A. 1956, The Classic Account of Gallipoli, Aurum Press LTD. (p.171)
[ii] ibid, pp.98-101
[iii] Niebuhr, R. 1945 ‘Today, Tomorrow & The Eternal’ in Discerning the Signs of the Times :Sermon Essays
The image in the photo above is of some knitted, red, poppy flowers. They mark the 100th anniversary of the ANZAC landings and were on display at a local show a few weeks back.
The Australian entertainer, and comic, also famous for the successful, Aussie larrikin vaudeville Saturday night regular, ‘Hey, Hey, It’s Saturday,’ (1971-2010) lamented the new morality, its Iron Curtain hecklers, and Soviet-era thugs, telling the Daily Telegraph,
“You couldn’t get away with half the stuff you could on Hey Hey now, because of political correctness and cancel culture. It’s a shame because showbiz doesn’t get much of a chance.”
The 69-year-old added,
“’A lot of comics can’t work much because what would have been just tongue-in-cheek previously now can easily get them into trouble. I can’t say I am enamoured with it, but it is a changing world in which we live and you just have to work around things.”
Somers’ comments were met with a deluge of hate on Twitter, as Jack’s goons – behind their morbidly heavy chairs, lattes, and expensive Apple computers, with their “everything is racist” CRT crusade, hiding their dissatisfaction with their own achievements in life – in true Red fashion, gave Somers’ “the gong.”
Then, and not without irony, the perpetually angry, run-of-the-mill, unsatisfied radical leftist jihadist, fighting imaginary Nazis online – heaped insults, ridicule, and “hate speech” at a man they don’t personally know, at a show, they don’t understand, and have probably never seen (other than selective ‘Hey, Hey it’s Saturday’ clips designed to stir up anti-Israel Folau level animosity to fever pitch), because of humour that goes over their immature heads.
With one such Twitter loudmouth claiming the cast “bullied Kamahl” (an Australian legend in his own right), reviving Kamahl’s grievances aired on ‘A Current Affair’ in 2011, about ‘Hey, Hey’s’ ‘ethnic comedy,’ while overlooking Daryl Somers telling ACA that he was ‘very fond of Kamahl, had the greatest respect for him and always will.’ Adding, “I think this is all rather silly.”
To add, what Australia’s version of America’s race-baiting racists didn’t bother mentioning, is that Kamahl made regular appearances on the show.
Kamahl joined hundreds of other musicians, who benefited from the cast’s ability to draw a crowd.
Far from delegitimising him because of ethnicity the “Hey, Hey” platform legitimised Kamahl, and made him a respected, household Australian name; helping him sell albums, and increase his fan base. (Noted by the fact that I’m writing about him 11 years after the show was cancelled.)
That’s the real “Hey, Hey” legacy. Not racism. Not sexism. Not homophobia. [Insert the long list of apparent phobias those of us are not on the Left are continually being diagnosed with, by those on the Left.]
The poor decision to include a blackface “Jackson Jive Show” in Red Faces during a 2009 reunion show, shouldn’t be the “Hey, Hey’s” defining moment. Irrespective of the joyless, graceless, and cold bony finger of Karl Marx reaching through his humourless, Cultural Marxist disciples today.
It’s a well-established fact, that without Daryl Somers, Australian artists, and the Australian music industry would never have achieved what it did. It’s no coincidence that the Australian music industry’s life support was pulled around the time ‘Hey, Hey, It’s Saturday’ ended.
Somers is a dead-set Aussie legend.
It’s good to see him speaking out.
Examine the claims. The problem isn’t Somers. It’s the hate-anything-Australian leftists, beating up Somers, tearing-down-others in order to make themselves famous.
The problem isn’t an Australian entertainment icon, who had the balls to put his face to an always controversial, vaudeville variety show with an original Aussie larrikin flair.
They often mocked themselves along with everyone else.
It’s worth repeating the words of Karl Barth,
“Away with the yardsticks! Those who cannot sigh with others, and laugh about themselves are warmongers.” (Attributed)
Cancel culture is fascism proper.
First published on Caldron Pool, 24th March, 2021.
©Rod Lampard, 2021.
Most honest, level-headed people on both sides of the political aisle would agree that the unrestrained, self-centred use of censorship as a weapon, is barbaric discrimination.
It’s big, bright, and dangerous false dawn; cheered on as it sets civil liberties and civil rights on fire wherever it is blown or directed.
The burnt scarring it leaves behind is left screaming silently to the world that the doctrine of original sin can be ignored, but never truly rejected, because its barbarism has, once again, punched its bloodthirsty fists through the gates; salivating after any opportunity to remove, censor, and/or if possible, rape and behead (Cancel Culture style) Conservative Christians, and Classical Liberals.
Chuck Colson called barbarism, ‘inhumanity done in the name of humanity, the killing of people for their own good.’
He said that the new Barbarians weren’t Goths or Vandals, with ‘clubs climbing over the walls, but the well-dressed people [comfortably] sitting in well-lit rooms with clean fingernails, deciding what was best for other people.’
You’d be spot on if you thought Colson was describing the current bureaucratic caste, legacy media, big tech, big medicine, big business, and their elitist egos, buttressed by self-congratulating sanitised tax-payer funded, leftist political bubbles, and a conditioned public programmed to kneel at every word.
High profile examples of this new barbarism were added this week to the systemic trend blacklisting all those refusing to fall in, line up, goose step in unison, salute, and take the [proverbial] Hitler oath of allegiance.
The cancelling of Gina Carano, Disney stamping trigger warnings all over Jim Henson’s creative legacy, ‘The Muppets,’ and Legacy Media throwing outspoken, Australian politician Craig Kelly under a bus, calling him, in sum, an “ego driven Trumpist, and threat to democracy.”
Christian conservative and former Western Australian, LNP candidate, Andrea Tokaji, ‘was dis-endorsed by the WA Liberal Party weeks before the 2021 Election after five months of campaigning for simply exercising her freedom of speech in an article she wrote months before being endorsed.’ (Rowan Dean, SkyNews)
Then there was Coca Cola repackaging the Nazi doctrine of Blut und Boden, by using their brand to push Critical Race Theory, telling white people to be less white.
While the woke World Council of Churches literally called the modern nation of Israel demonic, claiming that alleged human rights abuses were on the same level as white supremacists in South Africa. Noteworthy, the WCC failed to mention the Chi-comms crushing Hong Kong, threatening Taiwan, and incarcerating ethnic minorities, and Chinese Christians.
In addition, privileged “popstar” Madonna, worth $850 Million, while remaining completely silent about Gina Carano being booted from The Mandalorian, demanded an end to the patriarchy, because of male “systemic oppression”.
Even the Vatican was seemingly keen to join the bandwagon.
NPR reported that ‘Pope Francis accepted the resignation of Cardinal Robert Sarah (of Guinea), removing a conservative who was seen as an opponent of the Pope’s vision for the church.’
The differences were stark. Along with Cardinal Sarah’s conviction for the priesthood to maintain the practice of celibacy. Sarah held the line on irresponsible immigration (open borders), and the clear Biblical Christian line on homosexuality, Western Civilisation, and the ‘Churches’ relationship with the Muslim world.’
An exposition from the Express in the U.K. said that the relationship soured years ago. Instead of ‘removing Sarah directly, Francis decided to fill the liturgy department with a number of [centrists] who opposed his views.’
The Summit news concluded that the 75-year-old Cardinal’s retirement was ‘more of a firing’ because Sarah was ‘mandated to submit his resignation when he turned 75, while other serving in the position have been known to continue.’
Barbarianism is punching its way through the gates.
Out of control censorship is a false dawn, consuming all its being directed towards, and there are very few willing to put up a fight.
To paraphrase Colson, it’s easier to fight those whose actions are clearly inhumane. It’s harder to fight those who do inhumane things and call it “humane”.
Colson, C. 2015. A Flight to Amsterdam, My Final Word, Zondervan (p.42)
First published on Caldron Pool, 24th February 2021.
©Rod Lampard, 2021.