Culture – noblethemes

I Need ‘Reeducation Camp’ to Correct My Perspective!

Dare to Question Trump? One Supporter Would Lock You Up for Reorientation

I have known for a bit over two years now that Donald Trump scrapes the bottom of the barrel simply as a matter of everyday, ordinary life. This is and has always been his nature, to wit: that of an ethnocentric, chauvinistic, megalomaniac only interested in advancing his own interests, no matter who it hurts, and generally intent on getting his way in everything, everyday no matter how big or small.

Trump supporters are another case. At first, I really believed most of his supporters were basically ill-informed Never-Hillary Clinton voters, i.e. they simply refused to vote for Clinton, no matter what the alternative. After his first six to eight months in office, though, I began to realize Trump supporters were actually devotees, but I still held out some hope that they might, in certain cases, at least be reasonable.

To the contrary, however, avid Trump supporters, now dubbed “Trumpians,” simply grew more and more devoted and, consequently, increasingly blinded to any and all faults of their President. Eventually, they reached the point of no return, not even daring to question any of his statements and/or actions. To diehard Trumpians, their leader, much like a cult ruler, must always be right … perfect, in fact.

Yesterday, though, I was astounded ~ and, yes, it’s evidently possible for me to still be surprised by Trumpians ~ when one FB association and staunch, intransigent Trump supporter actually responded to my perspective on the Ukraine scandal and, more specifically, Joe and Hunter Biden and their (in his mind) alleged culpability in the whole mess by saying:

If you think the ___________ narrative even approximates the truth, then you need a re-education camp. You’re supporting nonsense…

Ahhh! Reeducation camp??? The only instances in history where you read or hear this terminology is from within totalitarian regimes, i.e. Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Maoist China, Cuba, etc. Yet here is one alt-right Trump supporter so blind in his loyalty to Trump that he actually went so far as to claim that someone ~ namely me ~ who disagrees with the statements, actions and propaganda of our current POTUS ought to be condemned to a reeducation camp!

Is there any longer any serious question that we now have present in American society a dangerous, socio-political cult centered upon Donald Trump? I think not, and it’s not only lamentable, it is also very frightening. How far will those so blinded by nefarious, hell-spawn lies and propaganda go? There’s no telling, but if history is any indication then actual violence may very well be in the offing. (And really, one could very well argue that alt-right, white supremist Trumpians have already committed acts of violence … numerous times!)

To top off this shocker, after I shared this in a primary post on my FB page, and responded appropriately, another Trumpian, whom I’ve known for umpteen years, actually jumped into the comment section lamenting that I’d become “so negative,” informing me she was sorely disappointed in me. What!!! And not one word about her fellow-Trumpian’ s remark about sending me to a reeducation camp. And I suppose that comment was not at all negative? Well, blind is blind and this is the unfortunate, tragic position of those imprisoned within a cult, religious or political or both.

And so, what now? Can these folks, these alt-right Trumpians, be somehow rescued? Made to see once again the truth of reality? Ah, but that’s just the problem, you see. I’ve come to realize that many, if not most, of these people have never actually had a good grasp on reality. Rather they’ve lived in a mostly white, Anglo-Saxon, evangelical, Protestant bubble, where until historically quite recently they’ve been quite safe and secure, unthreatened because they were in the majority and mostly calling the shots.

American society has drastically changed over the last two to three decades, though, and deep inside they’ve had to come to terms with the fact that they’re no longer in the driver’s seat, thus their deeply felt-need for Trump: loud-mouthed, crass, dictatorial bully (and buffoon), who promises to cater to all of their wants and wishes, even turning back the historical clock to a time when America was “their country.” And this is patently obvious in the way they speak, often referring to “saving our country.”

Later on, in another defense of Trump, the same alt-right intransigent supporter simply excused the President’s wrongdoing straight across the board, charging:

Stop being naïve; this is the way it’s always worked… It’s how the game is played. Get over it!

Oh really? Just get over it? Get over my own country, this wonderful constitutional democracy, being taken over by a fascist megalomaniac and his radical, dangerous cult followers? Uh … hell no!!!

India: On Independence Day

So dark and lovely, wrapped in ancient mystique,
Pointing back into the world before any history,
Serenely singing songs long held in Vedic mystery,
So strongly enduring the ages yet purely meek

Now banners fly with freedom’s flag held high
In memorial of everything done for liberty won,
Prizing peace with all neighbors under the sun,
And to never shun humble strength to exemplify

What festivity is festive enough for such people,
Who trace their roots to the earth’s foundation,
Other than the joy of such sacred reclamation
Of independence celebrated like soaring eagle?

Blood of Innocence: We Weep

Tanaga Tuesday

Streets flow with rivers of blood
And tears for lost innocence,
But do we make some pretense
Of concern for victimhood?

How now, then, will we respond
To such senseless violence
And screams from an ambulance
Answering hatred hell-spawned?

Can we not look for the day
When peace reigns in every heart
And all choose the better part
In pure love without dismay?

For now, though, we weep in pain,
Seeing again victims dead,
And feeling such awful dread,
Knowing this is all insane

Note: The Tanaga is a Filipino stanzaic form that was originally written in Tagolog. The form dates back to the 16th century and has an oral tradition. Syllabic with 7 syllables per line in any number of quatrains. Originally rhymed aaaa bbbb cccc etc., modern Tanagas also use aabb ccdd etc or abba cddc etc or any combination rhyme can be used.

Ignoble Confessions 1: The Swastika and My Abhorrent Adolescence

It was admittedly an unnerving question, especially since it was thrown out pointblank on social media for all the world to read, asked by someone who has known me since the seventh grade. In fact, the question was quite jarring emotionally and psychologically, as it probably should have been since it had to do with something so loathsome as the swastika and the ethnocentric racism it represents.

“Didn’t you used to like the swastika and all it stands for?” he asked in response to a report I posted on how the alt-right, neo-Nazis, and white supremists generally identify politically, as well as, more specifically, their use of Twitter and this company’s response to date. Bottom line, the folks at Twitter have hesitated to weed out racial, ethnic, and religious hate speech by algorithm because it would allegedly target an entire group of people who tend to identify with one particular political party.

The swastika appeared in the illustration for the article, which is what (I suppose) gave rise to the question concerning my past feelings and viewpoints. Of course, I answered the question, which really came across more like an indictment (which I can guess it was meant to be … as well as an embarrassment), and in doing so reminded this person that he was referring all the way back to our adolescence … basically at a time when I was young and stupid. However, when I reflected a bit more on that period of my life, I realized that the charge against me was really more important than I first imagined.

The truth is, even though I was only an adolescent, the fact that I was fascinated by Hitler, Nazi Germany, the swastika and all that rubbish is serious. Yes, I grew out of that quickly — certainly before graduating high school — but, still, I had entered into the darkness of racial/ethnic extremism for some (thankfully) short period of time. And the question naturally arises: Why? What happened to me from around 12 to 14 years old? Or what had I allowed to happen to me?

Well, the answer to these queries may honestly escape me — and by this I mean the “correct” answers, psychologically speaking — but I think I may at least have some ideas. For one thing, I had grown up in and lived within a culture — the southeastern United States — of embedded racism, oppression, marginalization and suspicion of non-Caucasians and non-Christians. In this cultural milieu it was expected that white Anglo-Saxon Protestants (or WASPs) would keep themselves separate and pure from all others, even while hypocritically claiming to be unprejudiced.

Along with this was really ludicrous rhetoric so many of us imbibed, such as: “We’re not prejudice, they are just culturally different and it’s not good to ‘mix’ with them, at least not too much.” And, of course, “there are some ‘good ones,’ but most of them are lazy and no-good, and they can’t really reach the intellectual, spiritual, and economic achievements achieved by the white, European, Protestant Christian race.” And, then, “it’s not that they shouldn’t have the same rights… It’s just they can’t really handle the responsibility. They really need to be supervised, guided and directed, almost like children.” And one of my favorites, “They’ve never had it as good as they’ve had it here, and they couldn’t move anywhere else and hope to have it as good as they do now.”

This is not all, though, as I strongly suspect my own terrible and deep insecurities played a role in my short-lived fascination with Hitler and his Nazi regime. I mean, my personal insecurity must be at least one reason I felt so attracted (at that point in my life) to raw power. You know, the fact that Adolf Hitler could seemingly hypnotize and control an entire nation stirred something inside me that to this day I can’t really fully explain. But it was almost as if the achievements of powerful figures, however nefarious and ultimately doomed, gave me some sense of … what? Safety? It did seem to embolden me (at that time in my adolescent life.) As a side-note, it’s also intriguing that, for some reason, I found no solace or sense of security in my faith-religion or spiritual tradition.

Finally, the third idea that comes to mind is tied to the first two, and it’s certainly a common problem for young people, and that is peer pressure. No, no one in my rank of friends told me to like the swastika and all it stood for, but there was plenty of racial/ethnic prejudice, accompanied by all of the racist remarks and misguided notions and jokes, etc. To fit in and, more importantly (at the time), to be truly accepted, I had to be an ethnocentric racist, who used the same language and laughed at all the jokes and whatnot. This does not excuse me, but it is part of an overall understanding of who and what I was during that confusing, oftentimes turbulent chapter in my life.

More than anything, I wish I could undo it all. Hitler, the Nazis, as well as white supremists and neo-Nazis today, are vile and reprehensible … and very dangerous. I can truly say I am deeply and forever thankful that I left that diabolical garbage behind before I even reached adulthood. More than this, I’m very thankful that my life pilgrimage has led me to this point in life in which I can truly see and appreciate the beauty of all people, all races and ethnicities, each and every culture, and every spiritual-religious tradition. I’m really in a much better place in life, and for this I’m a better person overall.

Unfortunately, the swastika and what it stands for was not all I had to grow through and leave behind. There were other, more deeply rooted beliefs, perspectives, and practices I needed to shed, like Calvinism, “Christian Reconstructionism,” sympathy for the old Confederacy, and what has now come to be called “alt-right conservativism.” All of this would take time, the patience of really good and caring people, and progressive maturation, as well as good old-fashioned life experience … but more on this next time.

We Believe They’re Evil: Party and Diversity in America

My good friend, Hank, alerted me to a recent survey and blog article that reported “many Americans think people in the other party are ignorant, spiteful, evil and generally destroying the country… About half of Democrats think Republicans are ignorant (54%) and spiteful (44%). Likewise, about half of Republicans think Democrats are ignorant (49%) and spiteful (54%). Twenty-one percent of Democrats think Republicans are evil, and about the same share of Republicans (23%) think Democrats are evil.” This is according to a November 2018 Axios poll first aired on HBO.

First of all I must respond by simply saying, “Wow!” Our country is, apparently, far more socio-politically divided than I imagined, but I haven’t had my head stuck in the sand either. Let me say for the record that, even though I identify as a democratic-socialist who aligns more comfortably with the Democrat Party, I do not believe most conservative Republicans are backward, ignorant, sexist, racists who are intent on destroying our country. In many, if not most cases misinformed and even misguided, perhaps, but not fiendish, nefarious individuals dedicated to wrecking society.

The results of the poll do point to an important divide in conviction and deeply held perception, though. How is it we’ve come to this point where so many folks in each party not only look at the “other side” with suspicion but even with disdain and loathing? Specifically, how is it each “side” has come to claim the moral high ground while at the same time condemning the other side as iniquitous and even malevolent? Well, perhaps part of the answer is that this is really not so completely new after all. It may be that when we look back upon the history of our country we may find some deep and wide moral-ethical ( as well as cultural and religious) divisions all along.

My friend, Hank, quoted the blog author (whom I’ve not had an opportunity to read) as opening his article by observing, “Our political and cultural environment has become so intensely moralized, in the sense of seeking with zeal virtue, absent prudence, that to compromise seems like giving in to evil.” And I agree with the second part of his statement — that is, that for many people compromising feels like giving in to evil — however, even though our political and cultural environment is very divided, it has not just now become so “intensely moralized” in its zealous quest for collective, socio-political and economic virtue, thus leading members of the two (or more) parties to harshly condemn members of the other (or some other) party.

Hank, quite gifted and deeply intelligent, surmises that if the blog author’s assessment is correct, then:

[T]he only way … it is correct is that fundamental change to our system, which includes change to the fundamental worldview of that system … is giving up what made us great as a country… The multi-cultural pluralism message is only a message because it doesn’t take into account the reality of fundamental transformation of our country and way of life … Everything may be already ‘gone with the wind,’ but there is a vast residual, in that case, who never were informed of the transformation and who never had a choice or chance to have themselves heard as the changes took place. So, the evil is what people expect to happen when the last vestige of our tradition is no more.

One might justly ask, however, precisely who is meant by “our” and specifically what is meant by “tradition.” In other words, just what is “our tradition?” To many white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants (the WASPs of old), the answer seems to come rather easily … but it also betrays gross over-simplification of American history. For in fact, America has always been multi-cultural, and the embryonic promises of the unique, constitutional, American democracy have only grown and matured down through the generations.

Yes, as Hank also observes, the newly formed United States was informed by an overall Judeo-Christian worldview, broadly speaking, and this broad worldview continued to influence our country at least until somewhat recently, historically speaking. Yet beneath the umbrella of Judeo-Christianity there existed quite some variety marking very important differences between groups, sects, and denominations. From the beginning, there were Quakers and Roman Catholics, Methodists and Presbyterians, Baptists and Congregationalists. There were also Jews and, among the slave population, even Muslims. And we certainly cannot forget the number of Deists and Unitarians to be counted among the Founders of this country… So there we have it: Diversity.

And culturally, there were, of course, English and Scottish, French and Germans, Africans and Spanish, and many Indigenous Peoples, as well as others. Each race and ethnic group brought with it their own cultural history and heritage, norms and habits, traditions and ways of life. This was all part of what made the American colonies so very unique, and the founding of the United States so different and even astonishing. That all of these disparate groups came together under the broad panoply of Judeo-Christianity is an important fact of history, yet one that ought not distort our view of that same rich and variegated history.

Certainly we must recognize that socio-political (and economic) controversy, and in the process claiming the moral high ground, has been part and parcel of American history. After all, the very nation itself was predicated upon self-evident, moral truth, and right from the beginning our Founders wrangled over the question of slavery. And there was some controversy in some states over tax-supported churches, and then there was the question of our relationship with the various Indigenous Peoples. And what about women and their “rightful place” in society? And the manufacturing and selling of alcohol? And the rights of common laborers? Safety in the workplace, quality standards for meats sold on the market, regulation of medications for public safety?

There is so much more from early on in our history that we can mention: Should we maintain a strong military or be more pacifist? Should we invade and conquer the West as part of our “Manifest Destiny” or respect the boundaries of Mexico? Should slaves be counted in the population of a state or not … or partly counted? Should an atheist be allowed to hold public office? And, yes, this was a question, but by the first half of the 20th century was, for the most part, answered in the affirmative. If the majority of voters vote someone into an office, then that individual should be allowed to serve, period.

But my friend nevertheless laments, “we have lost something great in this country and that is character,” and I do agree with him, though perhaps not in quite the same way. Character includes, among other virtues: honesty, integrity, and courage with love and compassion, and I simply do not see this currently issuing from the White House or the Republican Party in general. Still, we should not conclude that there has been some great overturning of the American society, or that what was established and generally accepted before is now “gone with the wind.” The wind has always been blowing in this part of the world, at least, and still blows today. Where it carries us largely depends on how we set our sails, and that is largely up to us, to be decided by “we the people.”

Now we should conclude by observing that, yes, as a matter of fact Judeo-Christianity has waned in this country, its influence much diminished, but why is that? Perhaps it is not so much that the larger population has rejected truth or, especially, the love of Christ Jesus presented in the Gospel, but rather has altogether and quite understandably rejected an overly-politicized, sham gospel that Jesus of Nazareth would also reject just as vehemently as he renounced the message of the religious leaders of his own day and time. Perhaps it is time for self-professing Christians, especially of the evangelical ilk, to “get back to the basics,” so to speak, in order to re-present the light, life, and love of Christ to the whole of the hungering world suffering in darkness, sin, and death. Maybe then the masses would listen once again. Maybe then the Judeo-Christian worldview would be taken seriously… Perhaps.

Another Silly Meme on Socialism

What an excellent example for Capitalists to use to try to prove some point against socialism: The infamous Monopoly game! Read this meme and then think about it for a minute. Digest the contents of this and try not to regurgitate. Now…

Ever wonder how Monopoly got its name? Because the objective was to buy up all properties, brutally running everyone else out of business, which meant out of their livelihoods, too, so no competition was left… It was literally the game to establish monopoly, i.e. winner literally takes all, leaving everyone else with nothing. Now that’s Unbridled Capitalism in a nutshell! (Of course, it is just a game … and one I’ve always personally enjoyed!)

But there more to this meme that strikes me as humorous. For example: In the game as it is, every player gets exactly $200 when passing Go, no more, no less. That’s equality of income, my friends. And anyone who lands on Income Tax must pay 10% or $200. Anyone who lands on Luxury Tax must pay $75, whether they have luxuries or not! LOL Anyone landing on Go To Jail must go to jail, and anyone landing on Free Parking … well, they get free parking! Imagine that: parking that’s free, income equality, justice for everyone across the board, equitability in taxation, not to mention equal distribution of wealth at the onset of the game… Wow! Even the game of Monopoly has built-in socialistic elements! Who’d have thought???

Perpetuating Another Myth: Government Funding of Abortion

I am and always have been pro-life; however, I have always tried to be careful in the information I share on this oh-so controversial topic … and I’ve encouraged others to please do the same, but I kind of got in trouble the other day when I replied to a misinformation meme that said, “Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the government funded adoptions instead of abortions?” I simply pointed out to my fellow pro-lifer that the government does not fund abortions per the 1977 Hyde Amendment. Planned Parenthood receives approximately $500 million per year as of 2016, none of which may be used for abortion procedures. It’s very important to keep our fact straight! He was not very happy with me.

So God Told Nehemiah to Rebuild the Wall

Evidently, somewhere along the way in the debate over Trump’s proposed Wall along the Mexican border, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi must have asked, “What would Jesus do?” I personally don’t remember her asking this, but many evangelicals started circulating a meme claiming that God told the Old Testament character, Nehemiah, to reconstruct the Wall around ancient Jerusalem; therefore, Jesus would presumably tell us to build our President’s “big, beautiful” Wall! The meme ends by saying to Pelosi something like, “So stop asking what Jesus would do and just read the Bible”

Huh? God told Nehemiah to rebuild the Wall around Jerusalem sometime in the fifth century B. C. (or BCE, if you prefer), so Jesus of Nazareth would instruct the 21st century United States to build a wall of protection along the Mexican border. Right? Yeah, right! This is so convoluted it’s not even funny, but folks shooting this meme around are actually quite serious, and will even add the fact that there is (supposedly) a wall around heaven, or the New Jerusalem, as it’s described in the apocalyptic Book of Revelation, perhaps the most symbolic and esoteric book in the Bible.

Of course, Nehemiah was also a eunuch, so maybe we should think about something similar for our POTUS???

Ah, but the lengths some will go to in order to prove a point… Ridiculous but often times funny, really! More later, and till then blessings to one and all!

Trafficking in People: What Solutions?

Thank heavens Republicans, Democrats, and the President were able to come to an agreement to at least temporarily reopen government, even if it is only for three weeks. At least the 800, 000 workers who have gone without pay will not only now go back to paying jobs, but will also receive very much needed backpay. Our prayers continue for them and their families.

In his remarks about this temporary agreement, though, President Trump used his time to make yet another pitch for the Wall. Well, we’ve heard his claims over and over again, and in this blog (as well as many other blogs and outlets), these claims have been reviewed … mostly. One that I personally have overlooked, however, has been his claim that thousands of human trafficking victims are smuggled across our southern border.

My apologies go out to the President and his supporters for this tragic oversight. Human trafficking is an extremely horrible problem involving tens of thousands of individuals “trafficked into the U. S. yearly,” according to the U. S. Department of State. And, indeed, the “Department of State also expresses that Mexico is the primary country of origin
for trafficking victims…” So, we do have a problem here, no doubt about it.

The U. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency recently reported:

In fiscal year 2016, HSI initiated 1,029 investigations with a nexus to human trafficking and recorded 1,952 arrests, 1,176 indictments, and 631 convictions; 435 victims were identified and assisted.

Impressive though this is, when comparing the above figures with the total number of individuals being trafficked into the country annually, we clearly have an awful lot of work to do, including better securing our southern border. How is this best achieved, though? Is the President correct in surmising that a strong, tall border wall from “sea to shining sea” will almost completely cut out human trafficking into the United States?

Several important factors in combatting human trafficking from Mexico involves Mexico itself, that is: Need for increased awareness, the strengthening of anti-trafficking laws, greater dedication to the enforcement of those laws, more compassionate response to and support of victims, and other necessary changes. Beyond this, though, there are some actions the United States can take.

According to Human Rights Along the U.S.-Mexico Border, which is a compilation of articles written on the subject, there needs to be “a comprehensive reform of U.S. immigration policy so that more people can come to the U.S. legally, instead of risking their lives and their livelihoods upon entrance.” The proponents of this idea also argue for “more effective usage and promotion of T-Visas.”

Another source, “Prostitution and Trafficking of Women and Children from Mexico to the United States,” argues that U.S. policies need specific improvements, including amending the requirement that “the burden of proof falls on the victims to show evidence of force, fraud, or coercion,” increasing victim services, and building stronger bilateral approaches with Mexico.

Another possible solution to this admittedly tragic problem is to build a wall along the Mexican border, which is just what President Trump has proposed as an almost fail-proof deterrent to illegal crossings … so the claim goes. However, Dr. Alexandra Still of Pepperdine University notes that “this option also is expensive, would take years to complete, and most likely would not be effective.” She continues to explain:

Migrants who are desperate to come to the U.S. … will find a way to continue coming … (so) this wall could prove useless in time. Furthermore, if this policy option did, in fact, lower levels of trafficking between the U.S. and Mexico, it would also trap people in vulnerable situations in Mexico, and it might increase trafficking between Mexico and other countries. This option violates all three criteria because it does not protect vulnerable persons, it is not enforceable, and it could increase tensions between the two countries.

Doubtless debate will continue on how best to counter human trafficking, but there are probably better options than building an extremely expensive wall that might ultimately prove ineffective anyway. For now, each of us should be both aware and vigilant. If you are in the United States and notice any suspicious activity in your community, call the ICE Tip Line at 1-866-DHS-2-ICE. For more information visit https://www.ice.gov/features/human-trafficking

Also of interest, and consulted for this article, is Pepperdine Policy Review: Solving Human Trafficking Between Mexico and the United States by Alexandra Still.

Peace in the Middle

Lady Liberty cries as angry words fly and malice stains the palates
Of youth untaught in the ways of grace when coming face to face
With elder glory in story boldly told in chanting prayer for peace,
And yet on the other side another mob from another world of hate,
Who throw out the bait by taunting, vaunting their own religiosity
In some monstrosity of twisted history with apocalyptic prophecy,
While one veteran man stands in the gap to quell the rising storm
As the foundations are being shaken to awaken our sleeping souls

The ‘Old Calendarists’ of America: The Dissection of an Influential Mentality

They are called “Old Calendarists” because they still use the ancient Julian (for Julius Caesar) calendar, and represent a small, though vocal, minority of Eastern Orthodox Christians. You see, some Eastern Orthodox churches simply refused to adopt the newer Gregorian calendar, which was a revision of the Julian made in the 16th century, because they saw the proposed adoption as a capitulation to the Roman papacy. So to this day, they continue using an outdated and inaccurate calendar in order to (ostensibly) maintain the purity of their faith. Weird, huh?

Well, more specifically, and admittedly more important, these churches have been adamantly opposed to revising the liturgical calendar of their churches, which was part and parcel of adopting the new Gregorian calendar, which was again modified in 1923 by the Serbian astronomer, Milutin Milanković. Now, you might justly wonder why in the world this should make any real difference. After all, wouldn’t you want to use a more accurate calendar? And, if you are an Orthodox Christian (as I am, by the way), couldn’t you continue celebrating all of the feasts and fasts of the year?

Why am I even mentioning this obscure subject, which doubtless interests hardly anyone, least of all my readers? It’s simply because it occurred to me, perhaps especially after reading a recent article by my friend J. D. Wills, that we have our own kind of “Old Calendarists” here in America. Call them “resisters” or “preservationists,” or what-have-you ~ although I resist applying the term “traditionalists” to this group ~ really they have much the same mentality as the Old Calendarists. Having grown up and lived most of my life in the deep South (i.e. the old Confederacy), I understand this.

There are some shared characteristics between the Old Calendarists of the East and resisting-preservationists in this country , including the deeply-rooted, felt-need to resist any and all changes that might be perceived as bowing to some opposing force, or group, even when that change is an overall good change or one that really has little affect on the truly important things of life. More than this, however, there is an unadulterated, hyper-conservative mentality that militates against change simply because it is change. This is the mentality that fueled “white flight” in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.

There are other shared characteristics, though, of which the following few come to mind:

The need to preserve a pure history.

History can often be confusing, especially when one is seeking truth, that is, trying to discover “what really happened,” or the “way it really was.” Now, I’m not so cynical as to think it’s not possible to arrive at some good, solid conclusions where history is concerned, but I do know that it’s oftentimes … well, messy. You know, it’s not the elementary schoolbook version, but resisting-preservationists need their history to be clean, smooth, easy to grasp and understand. Why? Because it underpins everything else they believe and, thus, how they live out their lives. For example, though the Judeo-Christian faith was an important theological-philosophical influence in the founding of this country, the Founding Fathers were, nevertheless, a mixed bag when it came to religion. Many were deists and many more were, to put it bluntly, little more than nominal Christians. The Declaration of Independence was, at best, a deistic document, and the Constitution not at all religious in any sense of the word. Period. This is not to say the newly birthed United States was irreligious, only that the pristine pure narrative of this country being founded as a Christian nation is, at the very least, complex. In other words, there’s more to say on the subject, and when one delves into the founding documents, writings, recorded speeches and whatnot of that era, one soon discovers the difficulty in simply, almost glibly saying, “We were founded as a Christian nation.” And this is only one example, but it leads to another point…

The good ole days were the best days.

Not only is history supposed to be pure and simple, it also needs to be good, truly good, for the resisting-preservationist. This is the anchor-hold for Old Calendarists, both East and West (including this country, of course.) After all, if the good ole days were really not so good, then why try to preserve them or bring them back? Now, don’t get me wrong. I certainly believe there is much ~ very much, in fact ~ to be deeply appreciated, and even in some cases revered, from the past. I abhor chronological arrogance; besides, as I said above, I’m an Eastern Orthodox Christian myself, so how in the world could I possibly despise the past??? That would be to despise my own salvation, as it were, and most especially my Lord Jesus, whom I love with a deep and abiding love and to whom I gladly cling in hope and joy. No, I’m not a despiser of the past, but neither am I a blind glorifier of some carefully selected past that I can use explicitly to justify my beliefs, perspectives and chosen lifestyle. For example, I’m proud to be an American, yet I feel no need whatsoever to “tidy up” the history of my great country. The resisting-preservationist, however, views the whole of his/her communal, or national, history as really and truly being the “good ole days,” when all things were as they should be and, consequently, s/he feels deeply compelled to return to those glory days … and even fight for that return.

If the good ole days were the best days, then these days are not.

In pining for the good ole days, it’s not difficult to understand how and why resisting-preservationists would look at the current scene rather gloomily. Looking back at the past nostalgically, they look at the present negatively. You’ve heard it, I’m sure: “Things just aren’t the way they used to be.” Right? Right. And so another narrative surfaces, one that casts a long, dark shadow over the whole world, and in this world the majority of the major players, if we might call them that, are held suspect. There is precious little talk about the very real freedoms we continue to enjoy in this country ~ including freedom of speech and religion ~ and very little mention of how modern technology has made our lives so much more convenient; hardly any thanksgiving for modern medicine and, comparatively speaking, good access to healthcare (which certainly needs to be improved, but…); very little talk about the relative safety we enjoy in this country, not to mention food and clothing and shelter. Only compare how billions of men, women, and children are forced to barely survive throughout the world and you would think there’s an awful lot for which to be grateful here in America … but for the resisting-preservationist, this contrasts too sharply, too vividly with his/her notion of the good ole days and the way things seem to be now. So, s/he must guard against too much light of reality penetrating into his/her preconceived notion of how the world, and nation, currently stand…

So build a wall or, better yet, a fortress.

We’ve all heard the term “fortress mentality,” and that’s what it is, really. It’s literally erecting a mental fortress around one’s whole belief system, or perspective on life and the world. Let nothing out ~ or, in other words, let nothing of one’s particular ideological view go ~ and let nothing in, i.e. let no one else’s perspective creep into the fortress. And it helps immensely to have friends in this fortress, of course. As the old saying goes, “Misery loves company.” Naturally, too, it’s much easier for these “Old Calendarists” of America ~ the resisting-preservationists ~ to perpetuate their pure and simple history as the good ole days (the best days), as well as their dim view of the contemporary scene with the consequent need to return to the nostalgic past when they do so together in the greatest numbers they can muster. Well, community is great, and we all love to be with folks who share our interests and hobbies and whatnot. I imagine we even like to have at least some friends who share our values and perspectives on life and the world around us … but here’s precisely the point: Most of us, I truly believe, also appreciate other viewpoints and perspectives, even other faith-religions, just as we surely appreciate art, literature and music from different cultures, even when it may not particularly be our “cup of tea,” so to speak. In an open and ideologically liberal society, we’ve learned to value other people and other cultures along with what they offer without feeling threatened or as if we’ve somehow compromised our own dearly, deeply held beliefs. Not so the resisting-preservationist. Any outward show of appreciation for something or someone different is perceived as a sign of weakness and/or compromise. What’s really terribly insidious about this (among other things) is that many of these folks actually, secretly love what they pretend to detest. But since they are in a fortress with others of like mind and heart, they cannot “out” themselves. There is safety and security in their enclave, and this safety and security is simply not worth sacrificing … for anything.

Well, so much for brief observations! Though much more could be added, I’ll quit now by simply reiterating (or confessing) that I know of what I speak. I’ve been there. I’ve been party to the “Old Calendarists” of this country, the resisting-preservationists. Consequently, nothing I’ve written is offered in a mean spirit at all, nor do I imagine it will effect any great change. I just thought that, perhaps, some of my readers might want to better understand what has become an extremely influential mentality (of an abnormally influential minority) in the U. S. I hope I’ve managed to provide this. If not, I apologize. I’ll try better next time! God bless!

There is a Storm Rising

There is a storm rising in the deep cauldron of the sea of humanity,
An untamed insanity, wailing louder and louder, like the wild child
Emerging from the jungle of irrationality to destroy all of banality,
To cannibalize civilization in the realization that it is but a carcass
Only to be eaten now in a free frenzied feast of half-starved beasts;
Woe be to the man of upper-clan, who but fans the flames of blame!
The storm rise is upon us, the size of which we cannot measure . . .
But there will be no pleasure, only pieces of what we now treasure