The ‘misguided compassion’ of Europe

From the Russia Insider, an accurate assessment of the disaster in Europe.
The writer sees the capitulation — no, the betrayal by the European ‘leadership’ as an effort to demolish what’s left of Christianity and the Christian heritage in Europe.

 “The fierce hatred of the Western political elite for Christianity has robbed Europe of its moral compass. Using Christian arguments for waging war on Christianity and Christian culture is a vile demonic parody. From a spiritual perspective, it is clear that Europe has made an unholy alliance with islamism in order to annihilate its Christian civilisation. This diabolical scam wears a cloak of goodness and humanitarianism, but it is really a manifestation of moral decay and false altruism that threatens to bring about Die Untergang des Abendlandes, the end of Christian Europe.”

I might add that much of what the author writes about the surrender by the authorities to the incoming flood of refugees, and the abandonment of the rule of law also applies to our slow-motion tsunami of immigration. And the same tactics, such as the cynical appeal to ‘Christian ethics’ or ‘compassion’ are used to  silence any real debate and to shame and even criminalize in some cases those who object. In some countries criticizing immigrants results in a jail sentence. Remember Emma West in England? Even in our country, several years ago a Midwestern woman was overheard (in a private conversation) saying that Hispanics (she used a slang term) should learn our language if they are living here. Some busybody called the police (!) and a court case followed.

The situation herein the United States is much the same as in Europe, but with a slightly different cast of characters and a slower pace. But the common factor is an elite which apparently wants to replace both the people and the culture of the country over which they rule.

Putin, defender of the Faith?

I hear and read a lot of comments describing Vladimir Putin as the ‘hope of Christianity’, more or less. Is he a Christian?

Many of the commenters on this You Tube video of Putin discussing his Christian faith believe he is a real Christian, and some of the comments are almost adoring, like this:

“i am american and they try to brainwash us..i refuse to watch the news and listen to them..if they succeed in dragging him to war i pray for putin to win. Please come get me out of america putin I want to go to russia lol”

This comment is interesting — from a Russian:

“Now in Russia even communists are going to church. Both communist and christians were fighting in RedArmy against nazi. Communist’s idea has a lot from christianity – hard labour, protect weak ppl, help older, help everybody who suffer.”

I think he’s wrong in likening Communism to Christianity; the former is a cruel parody of Christianity, and is a false messianic system wherein man is supposedly to be his own savior — at least, Communist man, or the ‘new Soviet man’ as was.

And Communism is all about this world, and material possessions. Christianity knows this world is passing and that gathering material things is not what life is about.

Many American Christians and conservatives see Putin defending the traditional family and marriage, taking a stand against homosexuality. It does seem as if he is socially conservative or traditional — but is this based on his Christian faith or is it simply a holdover from the earlier times in Russia and the old Soviet Union? If you are old enough to remember the Cold War days, the Soviet regime was puritanical in the extreme. Many American movies were banned, as was much American and Western popular music. Rock ‘n roll in particular was described as ‘decadent’, as was just about anything related to Western popular culture. And in retrospect, the Soviets/Russians were right. It was decadent; we are now seeing the fruits of the permissive and libertine trends that were promoted so relentlessly in the West, especially from the 1950s onward. (Yes, I did say the 1950s; the rot started setting in at least that early). Now look at the vile stuff that Hollywood produces, and consider pop culture ‘icons’ like Miley Cyrus, Lady Gaga, and a host of others. The seeds were sown decades ago, and we are seeing the ugly fruition. The Russians only lately began to tolerate libertinism, since the removal of the Iron Curtain. Crime and vice seemed to flourish in the new, ‘free’ Russia.

In the days of the Cold War, it seemed that the United States and Russia/USSR needed each other; our leadership and media held the Soviet Union up as an example of the evils of totalitarianism, contrasting their system to ours, which of course made us the paragons of freedom and individualism. Russia was the bogeyman that we were taught to fear, while the Russians held the United States up as a bad example and a threat to the world. Each side needed its evil opposite for propaganda purposes.

The avowedly atheist Soviet system was contrasted to our supposed ”freedom to worship as we please.” The USSR was a ‘godless atheist regime’ unlike our ‘pluralistic religious society’ where ‘Protestant, Catholic and Jew’ could have mutual respect and worship freely.

Now all that has changed. Drastically.

Each side, the old Soviet Union and our side, seem to have adopted some of the worst features of the feared Other Side. The Russians have embraced post-modern ‘morality’ — though Putin and some of the more old-fashioned have not accepted it wholesale — and they’ve adopted our capitalism in their own fashion.

Our side is no longer so free religiously. Christians can’t acknowledge their God in the public square, in the schools, or in many other situations. Our system suddenly looks more repressive than the old Soviet Union seemed, while we still cling to our cherished permissive society, despite the fact that it has been disastrous for us in so many ways. Some things don’t change.

As for Putin, he is a product of the old Russia, the pre-libertine, puritanical Russia. His views on social issues reflect that, certainly, as that’s the environment he grew up in. Is he a Christian, truly? As with everyone else, only God knows his heart. I can’t say he is not sincere in  his profession of faith. It may just be that his views are derived from the more traditional and strait-laced Russia in which he grew up.

Is Putin the hope of Christianity or of the West? Is Russia the hope for the future? I don’t know; I think some Americans, particularly hungry for leadership or for something or someone to idealize, are focusing on Russia and on Putin. It’s sad, because our own country should be producing good leaders and good examples to inspire us — but where are they when we so sorely need them?

It can’t be emphasized enough

Ann Corcoran at Refugee Resettlement Watch has an important post reporting on the 12 Annual Immigration and Law Conference in D.C. It’s worth reading but brace yourselves for the speakers’ remarks, full of the obligatory name-calling rhetoric decrying immigration skeptics or opponents.

But Ann Corcoran deserves kudos for her observation in the intro to her report on the conference. She comments about the distinction between legal immigration (supposedly good, according to the official narrative anyway) and illegal (which is less good, and is the only kind of immigration which people are allowed to criticize). The pro-immigration activists may be supporting only legal immigration while the frank open borders crowd want even illegal immigration regularized. But ultimately both factions are working towards more immigration, regardless of legal status or lack thereof. More immigration is the point, by any means necessary it appears.

She says:

It is unrestrained MASS MIGRATION (and wide open borders) that they all want and they are all working together toward that end while those of us concerned with the numbers assiduously kept the two issues separate. NO more!
Don’t let the pundits and the politicians (and the likes of Fox News) make the distinction either—Legal immigration is pure as the driven snow and Illegal is bad—call them out whenever they do it.  Again, this is about MASS MIGRATION straight-up”

Some of you know, if you’ve read my blog over the years, that I’ve been belaboring that issue, to the point of probably wearying my patient readers, ever since the inception of the old blog. And before that I was bending people’s ears in the ‘real world’ or on Republican forums, where I was often ‘flamed’ for my trouble — by the usual Party Faithful types, of course, or the Wall Street Journal-reading open borders fans — and all to no avail, it seems, as the Free Republic crowd still parrots the old line “as long as they come here legally…” — you know how it goes. Ad nauseum. Will it ever change? Will the average ‘respectable conservative’ ever get a clue, and think about what he is saying when he parrots this nonsense? I have doubts. Even with Donald Trump going where no ‘respectable conservative’ has ever gone before, in criticizing immigration, the old ‘legal is good’ mantra lives on, stubbornly.

So if an amnesty is declared tomorrow (probably by presidential fiat, if it were to happen) would that then make all the illegals ”welcome”, and ideal new citizens? Apparently so.

The Refugee Resettlement Watch Blog has gained a lot of readers in recent times, from what I gather, and I’m happy to see that well-deserved success. Ann Corcoran, as I said some years ago, does sterling work and she has merited the attention her efforts have brought. I hope that her words will be heeded by the milquetoasts on the ”right” who haven’t dared to question the cliche about ‘legal vs. illegal’ when it comes to immigration.

It’s mass migration, which in our day amounts to ethnic cleansing, and population replacement, that is the problem. We have to pinpoint and name the problem to address it properly.