Columns

By Erik Rush •

Many reading this will be familiar with the 2001 nature documentary series “The Blue Planet” and “Blue Planet II,” which aired in 2017. Produced by the BBC, both have been hailed as among the greatest documentaries ever made on our oceans. It is difficult to argue against this, given the time and meticulousness that went into the production of both series.

Unfortunately, like most nature documentaries produced in recent years (as well as a great deal of wholly unrelated media), the Blue Planet series pay gratuitous deference to the environmentalist movement in the form of alarmist propaganda embedded within the installments: “Unfortunately, vistas like these may soon become a thing of the past due to climate change…” [author paraphrase].

While we may roll our eyes at such doomsaying tripe, it is insidious little tidbits like these which often do sway uninitiated viewers, who are unable to read between the lines: “So vote for liberals and socialists, because they care about the planet…”

Of course, the initiated viewer of such fare knows that the liberals and socialists they’d be voting for don’t care any more for the planet than they do for ethnic minorities, women, homosexuals, the handicapped, the sexually abused, or any other group they’ve managed to coax into their tent. Here, they’re simply seeking the support of those who are concerned about the environment in order to cement their power.

This brings us to the current public unrest in France. For the last couple of weeks, hundreds of thousands of protestors all over the country have been demonstrating against President Emmanuel Macron’s green policies and onerous increases on fossil fuel taxes.

The demonstrations have garnered a fair amount of coverage in the press, since it involves a major Western nation essentially blowing up. However, considering that it does involve a major Western nation essentially blowing up, it hasn’t gotten nearly as much coverage as it deserves.

Why? Because it involves a major Western nation essentially blowing up due to its citizens’ opposition to socialistic policies.

While the demonstrations in France started out reasonably peacefully, they have become increasingly violent over time, with current damage estimates at around $1 billion. French police have employed tear gas and water cannons against demonstrators, and well over 1,000 of these have been taken into custody. Several deaths have been reported, including an 80-year-old woman in Marseille who died after being struck in the face with a tear gas canister.

Macron has been widely criticized for having a detached attitude toward protestor complaints which, due to the scope of the demonstrations, have far wider support than those who’ve taken it to the streets. The international press reported that Macron literally disappeared over the past weekend, and his subsequent appeals to the French people have ranged from impassioned to authoritarian to incoherent; on Monday, the beleaguered Macron pleaded with French employers to give workers a bonus, presumably in order to settle things down.

Well, this is socialism. It was sold to Europeans over the last several decades—much in the same manner in which it’s currently being sold to Americans—but Europeans are discovering that they don’t much like it. In principle, many still defend socialism, particularly if they’re young and ignorant, but in practice, it’s killing them.

In 2015, globalist elites and the grifters who run the European Union passed the Paris Agreement, a vehicle of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Under the Paris Agreement, each of 196 subscribed nations must “determine, plan, and regularly report on the contribution that it undertakes to mitigate global warming.”

While some nations are offering more resistance to this measure than others (President Donald Trump has expressed his intention to withdraw the U.S. from the agreement), obviously it has been seen by politicians in some nations as license to really put the screws to the people in the name of the environment.

When the latest thirty cent tax on diesel fuel hit in France, as press reports indicated, the rioting began.

I doubt that I need to point out that this will be a sign of things to come in America if we fail to stem the tide of socialism here. Culturally, Europe, Scandinavia and the United Kingdom have been rocketing down the toilet at breakneck speed for some time; now, things are starting to fall apart in terms of these ostensibly free societies being able to sustain socialist systems.

As we know, they can’t—not without the wholesale oppression of their citizens. At such a time, they become totalitarian regimes—which is the intended outcome. Green policies, carbon taxes and the like are no more than a money-grubbing, government-bloating con; the idea is that when those who’ve voted for all of these wonderful, nanny-state measures wake up one morning and find nooses around their necks, it will be too late to save themselves.

When I see such things as the violence in France, or the French university protests of 2009, or the ongoing demonstrations against illegal immigration in Germany, I often think of our Second Amendment. Why? Because it’s become clear that there are no lengths to which socialist power players will go, it’s just a question of how far they’re willing to go at a particular time.

In the context of how European socialism has evolved, it’s easy to see why leftists in America are so intent upon getting firearms out of the hands of private citizens. At this particular time, were our government to emulate that of Macron’s in the name of a U.N. environmental mandate, the protestors would probably be armed.

Which is as it should be.

Originally published in WorldNetDaily.

By Erik Rush •

Recently, I was struck by a profound parallel between our nation and the addict (to hard drugs, alcohol, pornography, gambling etc.). It’s nothing as superficial as both being “hooked” on destructive, fleeting or worldly things, as ancient wisdom from the Bible to the Buddha admonish people to avoid. This runs far deeper, although the fundamental nature of the analogue is so stark that I’m surprised I didn’t see it sooner. I’ve never hidden the fact that I’ve had some experience with addiction, and it’s not because I was formally educated in it as an area of study.

The addict develops such a compelling physical and/or psychological affinity for their substance or activity of choice that the obsession crowds out nearly all other concerns. We’ve heard of the studies in which laboratory animals are offered some addictive substance ad libitum (as much as they care to consume). The animals ultimately choose the given substance over food, water, and even sex. Finally, they die.

Addiction in humans produces markedly deleterious effects, as we have seen illustrated in countless press reports and medical studies over the years. While all addictions don’t necessarily kill, most carry the potential for ruining lives, marriages, families, and businesses. In the early 1970s, the federal government and medical community began to recognize alcoholism and drug abuse as having components of mental illness; the current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III,V) now classifies both as mental illnesses. What ultimately caused these bodies to do so is the fact that addictions are so compelling that they displace the basic survival instinct.

It has been known since at least the early Twentieth Century that the medical community (including specialists in psychology) have been able to accomplish precious little in ameliorating the suffering of addicts, even those who desperately wish to change their behavior. Yet they’ve continued to press on in their ineffective treatment modalities, expanding on them and ultimately giving rise to thousands of treatment centers, an industry which, like many others, thrives on the business of repeat customers.

In the mid-1930s, a concept discovered by a few lay people and acknowledged by some members of the medical community began to take hold: Treatment for addictions which were based upon spiritual principles were far more successful in keeping addicts recovered in the long term than anything medicine or psychology had to offer. In fact, this was even corroborated by eminent psychologists like Carl Jung.

Now, we’re not talking mere religion. Many addicts have been deeply religious, and many an alcoholic or hard drug addict have made tearful entreaties to the heavens for help as realization of their plight took hold, praying to be “struck sober.” I suppose that in theory this is possible, but I’ve yet to see it occur. What they discovered in the 1930s was that the correct application of spiritual principles was necessary in order to bring about the desired change in the addict.

How does this correlate to America and the widespread social malaise we’ve seen proliferating since the latter decades of the Twentieth Century? Glad you asked.

It is readily apparent that while most Americans are still professing Christians, the numbers of practicing Christians has fallen dramatically in recent decades. This has been in part due to the emergent cult of narcissism that began during the 1960s and which has been fueled by the political left. The church itself was infiltrated by such apostate doctrines as Black Liberation Theology and Social Justice Christianity, which have their roots in Marxism. Many of the millions of Christians who remain, even in denominational churches, have become lukewarm, to use biblical terminology. Finally, the tolerance of leftists’ open hostility toward Christians has cowed many believers, as well as having demonized the Church at large.

Thus, the spiritual development of many Christians has suffered. Additionally, those among Americans who profess to be “spiritual, but not religious,” or who hold more esoteric spiritual beliefs, are often monumentally shallow, self-seeking, pretentious middle class dilettantes.
All this has given rise on a collective level to the same spiritual emptiness from which addicts universally suffer, and which is ultimately filled with dangerous and unhealthy things.

The toll this has taken in every sector of this nation cannot be underestimated. When I was growing up just outside the Bronx in New York, a third grader could dash out of the house after school or on a summer day; their mothers would have no idea of their whereabouts, and no one was worried after or scolded unless they showed up late for dinner. This sort of behavior has been unheard-of in most communities for years now; children of that age have been snatched from their front yards in broad daylight, in full view of their playmates, to be found raped and murdered miles away and days later.

Decades ago, a corrupt politician or corporate chieftain was simply interested in becoming wealthy. Now, they’re perfectly willing to sell America out to the Chinese or Islamist interests in the process, not to mention the vast majority of politicians who have sold us all out in favor of an America transformed into a squalid, euro-socialist toilet.

I could go on with examples ad infinitum, but I will submit that it is the erosion of our moral foundation, brought on by an abandonment of spiritual principles, which has given rise to all these phenomena.

Concerning the correct application of spiritual principles as it applies to America and her collective “recovery”: Our nation has never been perfectly uniform in its spiritual alignment, but for nearly 200 years, we were all pulling in pretty much the same direction. Sadly, that direction has been lost.

Like the addict, until we take the first step and acknowledge the problem, we will continue in our vain attempts to fill that spiritual void with dangerous and unhealthy things.

Originally published in WorldNetDaily