Tag Archives: Woodrow Wilson

EXPECT MORE CHARLOTTESVILLES

The one question nobody has asked in all the discussion over events in Charlottesville, Virginia, is this:   why was the statue of Robert E. Lee, a giant of American history, being pulled down in the first place?   In the last few years, only ISIS and the Taliban have destroyed statues.   Are Americans now to copy them in an attempt to erase history?

It was this action that provoked the demonstration by white people, who have been labeled “racists”, “white nationalists”, “white supremacists”, “fascists”, “Nazis”, “neo-Nazis” and other names.

They were also called liars.   Yet, for fifty years, Americans have been fed a lie by liberals in both political parties.   The lie?   That ethnicity doesn’t matter any more.  Multiculturalism has been the fashion of the time.   This period has been an aberration in history – the denial of ethnicity (but only in the West).   This overlooks the fact that people identify first and foremost with their ethnic group.   The “Black Lives Matter” movement of the last four years shows this to be a fact.

The great African-American boxer, Muhammad Ali, once observed:

“It is against God’s law to integrate.   It’s only nature, not hatred, to keep people among their own kind.   A man has to be a fool to want to live in any other culture but his own.”

This quote shows just how much American thinking has changed in fifty years!

If a white American made the same comment today, he would be labeled “racist” and likely prosecuted.

Yet, Ali’s comment should help us understand the “white nationalist” movement that has been in the news over the weekend, following a demonstration that went wrong in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Before we leave Muhammed Ali, here’s another quote from him:

“Bluebirds like to be together, eagles hang out with eagles, sparrows stick with sparrows, buzzards go with buzzards.   They’re all birds, but they go with their own.”

Again, you couldn’t say that today.

Clearly, attitudes change.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Before 1965, America was 88.6% white (1960 census).    It’s fair to say that they considered their country the best in the world.  They wanted to keep it the way it was and immigration policies reflected their desire to maintain the racial balance.   Immigrants from Europe were preferred; and restrictions were put on immigrants from the rest of the world.   By our standards today, they were all racists!

President Theodore Roosevelt, who died exactly a century ago, warned that the Anglo-Saxon race was in peril because of a high rate of breeding amongst non-Anglos and the tendency of the Anglo-Saxons to voluntarily practice birth control, which he condemned.

From Minnesota Public Radio:

At the turn of the 20th century, infertility became an obsession for the eugenics movement.  The growing scientific field of genetics led some political leaders to embrace the notion of controlled breeding to favor “advanced” races.   White Americans feared an “infertility crisis” in their neighborhoods.   President Theodore Roosevelt warned in 1903 that immigrants and minorities were too fertile, and that Anglo-Saxons risked committing “race suicide” by using birth control and failing to keep up baby-for-baby.

In one speech, Roosevelt said:   “The chief of blessings for any nation is that it shall leave its seed to inherit the land.   The greatest of all curses is sterility, and the severest of all condemnations should be that visited upon willful sterility.”

The notion of breeding as an act of national service would reappear during World War II.”

Take note of the final paragraph – that those who fought the fascists in World War II thought that breeding white Anglo-Saxons was a national service for Americans.

A few years after TR, Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, oversaw unprecedented segregation in federal government offices.

The Democrats gave birth to the Ku Klux Klan, glorified in the 1915 movie “The Birth of a Nation,” a movie Wilson lauded.   It’s considered the most influential movie in history.   It was blatantly racist.

Clearly, the white nationalist movement is not new.   The movement today is perhaps more desperate, facing the realization that in less than twenty years, after four centuries of domination by one ethnic group, America will be a non-white country.   That will change everything, as assuredly as it has done elsewhere in the world.  When domination by one ethnic group ends, fundamental changes take place that target the ethnic group losing power.

This is already happening, and not just in the United States.   The destruction of Confederate statues in southern states is similar to the destruction of Cecil Rhodes statues and other monuments in southern Africa; in England, too, attempts were made to destroy statues of Rhodes at Oxford University, though doubtless students would still be willing to accept Rhodes scholarships.

All of this reflects the growing numbers of non-whites, together with their liberal-leftist supporters who want to destroy America and replace it with something else.

Every TV station, without exception, failed to give any background to the “white nationalist” demonstration.   There was a concerted campaign to denigrate them, calling them “fascists,” “white supremacists” and other names, with no attempt to understand their frustrations.    Undoubtedly, some could be labelled with these words, and the television media loves to zero in on those in particular, but many are motivated by a simple desire to preserve their national identity, including their own history and culture.

Since 1965, with the passing of a new Immigration Act, that encouraged immigration from Africa, Asia, the Middle East and South America, we have witnessed a deliberate and concerted campaign to finish off traditional America.   The bill was sponsored by Senator Edward Kennedy who promised it would not change the demographics of America; Republicans favored it to get cheap labor for factories and in agriculture.   No thought was given to assimilation, or, rather, the lack of it.

When TV reporters last weekend talked about all the lies coming from the “white nationalists” they never once mentioned the lies of the last 50 years from both political parties about the coming destruction of the America built up in earlier centuries.

A backlash was inevitable.  It did not start in Charlottesville.   It was even apparent at the last election, won by Donald Trump.   Support from disgruntled whites, who have lost their good-paying jobs to other countries and are having to compete at the bottom of the financial ladder with imported domestic labor, put Trump in the White House.   Many of those who supported him will slowly realize that they cannot reverse the trends through the ballot box.   Their only option will be the streets.   At that point, there may be similarities with the fascist movements in Germany and Italy in the 1930’s.

RETURNING TO ETHNICITY

What we are witnessing in the United States and other western nations is a return to ethnicity.   Politicians and the media will quickly condemn this.   But it needs to be remembered that ethnic identity was very much a part of peoples’ lives down through the centuries. In the last two generations, an attempt was made to eradicate ethnic identity.   In the West, this was at the expense of white people who were forced to change their thinking on everything, involuntarily.   A backlash was only to be expected.   The liberal-leftist multiculturalists assumed everybody would agree with them but, unfortunately for them, some people still think for themselves.

And they do not appreciate their heritage being attacked.

Jesus Christ predicted that one of the signs of the end-time is that “nation will rise against nation, kingdom against kingdom” (Matthew 24:7).   Whereas a kingdom is a political entity like the United States, the word for “nation” used here is ethnos, meaning ethnic group. Ethnic groups will turn against each other is what He was saying.

In Charlottesville, we witnessed a return to ethnicity.

It didn’t start in Charlottesville – and it won’t end there.

Expect more Charlottesvilles.

(This blog is a fully independent blog that has no connection to any church or secular organization. It was started to keep people informed on international affairs in light of the scriptures.   Financial support comes from myself and readers who generously donate to help cover costs.)

Advertisements

GERMAN CALL FOR EU ARMY MORNING AFTER TRUMP VICTORY

daniel-craig-and-queen-elizabeth

Fears that America is turning inward were often expressed during the election campaign that resulted in Donald Trump becoming the next president.

As if to prove the fears well-founded, US media has concentrated on domestic concerns for the new presidency.

But, overseas, there is also great concern, as evidenced by the following report from Europe.

“Donald Trump’s victory, as well as Brexit, ought to speed up plans for EU defense integration, Germany has said.

“Europe needs the common political will for more security policy relevance. The outcome of the election in America could provide an additional impetus,” German defense minister Ursula von der Leyen said in an opinion article in the Rheinische Post, a German newspaper, on Thursday (10 November.)

“The Brexit decision and the election in the United States have set a new course” for Europe, she added.

She said it was “difficult for Germany and Europe, on the day after the election, to assess what to expect from a Trump presidency.”

She predicted that the US would initially turn inward “to heal the tremendous internal turmoil in the country” that arose from Trump’s divisive campaign.

She said EU security would continue to depend on the US and on NATO, but she said Trump’s victory meant that Europe, and Germany as “a great nation in the centre of Europe”, would have to be “more self-reliant on security issues”.

Von der Leyen spoke of “building a common security and defense organization” that would concentrate on stabilizing African and Middle East countries in order to alleviate the flows of refugees coming to Europe.” (italics mine)

(Andrew Rettman, “Germany:  Trump victory to speed up EU military union,” EU Observer)

An army to rival Russia:  Germany calls for joint EU defense budget to take on Putin (Nick Gutteridge, Daily Express, October 19th)

Two weeks before the US election, Nick Gutteridge of the Daily Express (UK) wrote that Germany wants a European military force to rival Russia’s.  This would, of course, also mean that it would rival America’s.

The European Union has approximately 500 million people without Britain.  It is also the world’s biggest single market with a currency that is used more widely than any other.  It, therefore, has the potential to be the world’s greatest military power.

These articles are particularly significant in the light of President-elect Trump’s comments that NATO countries are not contributing enough to their own defense.  He is also on record as saying that NATO has outlived its usefulness.  However, on Monday he made it clear that he is committed to the military alliance.  The alliance was founded in 1949.  At the time it was said the organization was intended “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down”.  That cynical comment is effectively negated by Germany’s new dominant role on the European continent, the leader of the EU and the country set to dominate the EU’s military force.

The proposed military force was not possible until June’s Brexit vote in the United Kingdom. Britain has always opposed a European military union believing that it will undermine US-led NATO.   Some other countries in the EU are not in favor, either.   When the military union comes into existence, possibly as early as next year, it’s likely only a dozen countries will join.

Note the following from Der Spiegel, Germany’s leading news magazine:

“For 100 years, the United States was the leader of the free world.  With the election of Donald Trump, America has now abdicated that role.  It is time for Europe, and Angela Merkel, to step into the void.

The West was constituted in its modern form in January 1917. World War I was raging in Europe at the time and in Washington, D.C., President Woodrow Wilson told his country that it was time for Americans to take responsibility for “peace and justice.”  In April he said:  “The world must be made safe for democracy.”  He declared war on Germany and sent soldiers to Europe to secure victory for the Western democracies — and the United States assumed the leadership of the Western world. It was an early phase of political globalization.

One hundred years later:  Trump.”

While President Wilson did say the words quoted above, his enthusiasm was soon dampened by Congress and America did not really get involved in the world until 25 years later. It wasn’t until after World War II that the US rose to prominence, replacing Great Britain in it’s super power role.   February 1947 was the month when it was first realized that Britain was handing over its international policeman role to the Americans. You can read about this in “Picking up the reins” by Norman Moss.   So, when President Trump is sworn in, it will be just a few days before America’s leadership role turns 70.   Babylon, the world’s first super-power was at the top for only seventy years.   President-elect Trump wants to put “America First” – is it possible for the US to turn its back on the rest of the world? Mr. Trump says no.  But others are not so sure.

Today’s Wall Street Journal carried the headline:

“European Union Backs Plan to Expand Military Coordination”

Britain’s decision to leave the EU and the election of Donald Trump give fresh impetus to Europe to come up with new plans for security cooperation.”

While Donald Trump is reassuring the European NATO allies of America’s commitment, the continental Europeans are hedging their bets.

The next few years could see the alliance unraveling.

Bible students are well aware that the biblical book of Revelation, which describes events in our age, tells us that ten nations will come together in Europe to form a formidable political and military union.   These ten are the next prophesied super-power.  They are also the last, as their brief period of dominance ends with the Kingdom of God.

“The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast.  These are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast.  These will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings; and those who are with Him are called, chosen, and faithful.” (Revelation 17:12-14)

————————————————————————————-

POLLSTERS WRONG AGAIN

We used to get frequent annoying and intrusive calls from pollsters asking all kinds of questions to try to determine our views on different issues and what we thought of the candidates.  This year we got no such calls.

I suspect the reason is that we no longer have a landline.   Perhaps this goes part of the way to explaining how the polls got it so wrong.  Most young people only have a cell phone — that’s also the case with many older people who can no longer afford to have both a landline and a cell phone.

This may partly explain why the polls were wrong.   They were also wrong over Brexit, predicting the people would vote to “Remain” in the EU.   The “Leave” campaign used a company called “Cambridge Analytica” to help them win.  The UK company used data from over 5,000 people to determine the best way to get their message across.

Donald Trump hired the same company for his campaign.

In both campaigns they found that 3% of voters were “shy Tories.” This was the term they used to describe very conservative people who kept their views to themselves.   Many people felt intimidated in conversations with intellectuals who would try to bully or shame them into supporting “Remain.”   The same “shy Tories” in the US were secret Trump supporters — after Mr. Trump’s more outrageous comments it didn’t seem respectable to hold to pro-Trump views.

But support Trump they did.

These voters want change.

As with Brexit, a big issue was immigration and the perception that many new immigrants refuse to assimilate and even threaten national security.   They also want to “drain the swamp,” to reduce both the size and the cost of the federal government.

——————————————————————

Germany:  Government Carries Out Raids, Bans Religious Organization

Germany’s government has banned an Islamic organization known as True Religion, German Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere said, the New York Times reported Nov. 15.  The announcement comes as German authorities carried out raids on nearly 200 properties associated with the group across the country.  De Maiziere said the group was a recruiting pool for potential militants, adding that 140 supporters of the group have traveled to Iraq or Syria to join the Islamic State.  Though police confiscated materials during the raids, no arrests were made.   A number of attacks in Germany over the past year have fueled fears of migrants.  (Stratfor, 11/15/16)

 

HOLLYWOOD IS NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF TEACHING HISTORY

Patriot

Hollywood is adding to US foreign policy woes at an incredible rate. No less than four current movies are causing upsets in various parts of the world.

“The Interview” has received a lot of attention.   I have not seen it and would have had no interest in seeing it, if North Korea’s paranoid regime hadn’t flipped out over the movie, blaming the US president personally for its showing. (When you’ve grown up in a country where the “Dear Leader” decides everything, it’s not surprising that people think the US president plays the same role in America!)

The movie revolves around a comedic attempt to assassinate the leader of North Korea. Along the way it makes fun of the more comical aspects of the regime.

As the US has never had good relations with North Korea anyway, Pyongyang’s anger can largely be ignored. But other movies are also a problem.

“American Sniper” has been labeled racist by Muslims who see the conflict with ISIS as a continuation of the clash of civilizations between the “Christian” West and the Islamic world. The movie tells the true story of the US military’s greatest sniper, who killed over 200 people during the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. As all his victims were Muslims, he, therefore, must be a racist. Don’t look for logic – it’s not a strong point with people who grew up in the Middle East.

“Unbroken” is also a problem, this time with the Japanese. Conservatives in the country are upset over the way Japan’s troops are portrayed in the film, which again is a true story, telling the story of Olympic athlete Louis Zamperini’s experience in a Japanese prisoner-of-war camp in WWII.   It’s not the first movie to depict the horrors of life in a Japanese POW camp.   They had no respect for prisoners as their own military culture taught that fighting to the death was preferable to surrender.

The truth is the truth. No apologies need be made for “American Sniper” or “Unbroken”, assuming they stuck to the truth.

Even “Exodus” has been quite controversial, thousands of years after the event. My wife and I didn’t like it. Nor did the Egyptians who said it was “inaccurate,” that Jewish slaves did not build the pyramids and that the depiction of ancient Egyptians was not accurate. Although the depiction of the plagues was interesting and imaginative, and Christian Bale played a convincing Moses, the parting of the Red Sea and receiving of the Ten Commandments were much better in the 1956 version, when special effects were more primitive.   Perhaps the downplaying of the commandments reflects changing societal attitudes in the interim decades.

In Egypt, ‘Censors objected to the “intentional gross historical fallacies that offend Egypt and its pharaonic ancient history in yet another attempt to Judaize Egyptian civilization, which confirms the international Zionist fingerprints all over the film,” the statement said.

The ministry said the movie inaccurately depicts ancient Egyptians as “savages” who kill and hang Jews, arguing that hanging did not exist in ancient Egypt. It said the film also presents a “racist” depiction of Jews as a people who mounted an armed rebellion. The ministry said religious scriptures present Jews as weak and oppressed.

The statement also objected to the depiction of God as a child, which also drew criticism in the West.’  (Seattle Times, December 28th)

Hollywood has always had a problem with religion, rarely depicting biblical events with any degree of accuracy. “The Ten Commandments” (1956) was one of the better biblical movies, with considerable input from Josephus.

But Hollywood has also had a serious problem with history. I cannot think of any historical movie made in Hollywood that was 100% accurate. “Braveheart” has been labeled the most historically inaccurate movie ever made, with 87 historical inaccuracies, according to one website. Another Mel Gibson movie, “The Patriot” got the prize for the fourth most inaccurate movie in history. Amongst other things, the movie depicted British soldiers burning down a church with people in it. The film was set during the Revolutionary War.   British soldiers have never burned down a church full of worshippers, never at any time in history. If they did, they would be court-martialed and severely punished. But it made for great entertainment!

Mel Gibson defended these movies by saying, “We are not in the business of teaching history. We are in the business of providing entertainment to make money.” (The quote is a paraphrase heard on NPR many years ago.)

At least he was honest. Perhaps his anti-semitic rantings owe their origin to the same ignorance of history!

Hollywood has always had a problem with history.

Exactly a century ago next month, what is considered the most influential movie in American history, premiered. “The Birth of a Nation” was an anti-black, pro-KKK movie that led to riots in cities across America. The film was set during the Civil War and Reconstruction and blamed African-Americans for the problems that plagued the US during this period. The NAACP tried to get the film banned. The movie was the first motion picture screened at the White House, then occupied by President Woodrow Wilson.

In an age when few people read anything in depth, preferring to spend their time with electronic gadgets, including TV and DVD’s, movies are perceived as fact.   But they rarely are. If you want to know the facts, you have to read and do the research.

The 1960 John Wayne movie “The Alamo” was made with two historical advisers during production. One of them walked off the set saying, “there isn’t one minute of historical accuracy in this film” but it hasn’t stopped people watching it in the last 55 years.

Hollywood has a responsibility to strive for accuracy. It can be done. Good movies can be made while maintaining accuracy. “To Kill a King” is a prime example. This is a British movie about the English Civil War, the execution of the King and the subsequent Republic under Oliver Cromwell. The film was lauded by historians as the most accurate historical movie ever made.

Sadly, it’s hard to track down. Perhaps, after all, people are not interested in facts – they just want to be entertained!