Saturday, October 23, 2021

Accountability - by Karl Denninger

 One of the more-ridiculous refrains that is constantly heard is that "there is no accountability for X", where X is one of:

  • Illegal invaders raping or murdering our citizens.

  • Jab and mask mandates, particularly when it comes to children or threats to your basic ability to earn a living.

  • "Bathroom and locker room choice" for people who cannot be bothered to look between their legs to determine their sex.

  • Flat-out illegal collusion including "price-by-insurance-carried" only after service is performed, which I remind you has been illegal for over 100 years in the form of 15 USC Chapter 1, confirmed to apply not once but twice by the USSC, in respect to medical services in the United States.

  • "I want you to panic" - Greta Thunberg.  Nations did.  Last winter people had property destroyed in Texas and a few died as a direct consequence.  Coal plants were shut down and natural gas pipeline pumps that ran on the gas in the pipe were replaced with electric ones.  No renewable power, no electricity and no gas pressure either.

And more, of course.

The assertion that no accountability is available for such rampant violations of both law and reason are false.

There is in fact unlimited accountability that can be brought to bear on each and every individual responsible for said mandates and policies, whether they be politicians, corporate officers, directors, HR personnel, teachers, Superintendents, School board members or even just your direct boss.

That accountability -- and the responsibility to apply it as required -- rests with you.

It's simply a matter of mathematics -- and your fear which they deliberately cultivate.   You may be enraged if your daughter is raped in a school restroom by a trans "boy" who decided he's a girl only long enough to get in there, then suddenly "he's a boy again" because he used his boy parts to commit the rape, didn't he?  Obviously said person was fully aware of his actual sex -- and your school and government coddled what was clearly mental illness and depravity which is direct reason that your daughter was raped.

Let's not forget that our federal government has threatened to "prosecute" parents who are enraged that a girl was raped as a direct consequence of the local, state and federal government's decision to pander to said selective claim of being "trans" which evaporated at the instant the instrument of rape, a penis, came out of the pants.

Anyone with two IQ points to rub together knows that said "trans" claiming person was 100% full of crap and was not in any way actually of the belief they were or are a girl.  A girl has no use for a penis and thus if there is one currently physically attached an actual trans girl would find it useless for any sexual purpose whatsoever, including of course a felony criminal purpose.  In short you put a criminal's "comfort" and intentional lie in front of the victim's safety.

This was not an accident ladies and gentlemen it was intentional so take a bow as to the outcome you permitted exactly as you would by handing a full can of gasoline and a lighter to an arsonist.

Of course you cannot in "polite" company point any of this out today but truth has nothing to do with politics, consensus, or democracy.  It is true irrespective of how many people believe it, just as a falsehood is false no matter how many people believe it.  Indeed something that is false can be believed by 100% of the people and it does not become not-false as a consequence of the number of believers.

That masks are worthless to deter respiratory pathogens has been proved through more than 40 years of scientific study.  Indeed said devices are of dubious value for bacterial respiratory pathogens which are many, many times larger in size.  That original study demonstrating that masks were of no value even with every single user being a highly-trained medical professional was attempted to be falsified more than a dozen times in the ensuing years and not once was statistically-valid refutation obtained.  Yet today, 40 years hence, this lie remains promoted and repeated by medical providers all over the world.  I remind you that Semmelweis demonstrated that contamination of the hands was largely responsible for obstetrical transmission of disease, not "evil spirits", and he was literally drummed out of medicine and driven insane by those who claimed he was not only wrong he was a heretic and agent of the Devil besides.  The truth, however, was not changed to a lie by the near-unanimous claims of the medical profession.  Today we do not doubt that microbial contamination from one infected entity or item to a non-infected entity is how disease transmission occurs but that did not "become" true when it was medically accepted; it was always true.

That the current jabs are not vaccines is not in question; it is truth. The government has changed the definition of a "vaccine" but you cannot change something that is false into something that is true by making a claim that it is so.  A vaccine is a preparation that causes or mimics actual infection but is either attenuated or killed so that it will not harm you.  The current "clot shots" are genetic programming designed to alter the core processes of your cells.  That the intended outcome of this is to produce an immune response protective against a pathogen does not change the fact that they are not vaccines and that we have discovered the direct result of said programming is pathogenic is not in scientific question either; it is, and is almost-certainly responsible for all the adverse effects of same.  A therapy alters the core processes of your cells to combat a disease; every drug in the pharmacy does this in one form or another.  Whether said reprogramming is good, bad, effective or not isn't the question; it is the claim that such constitutes a "vaccine" that is medically and scientifically false, and no matter how many people believe it, whether that number is zero or 100% of the population does not change the falsity of the statement.

That there has never been a successful vaccine -- an actual vaccine -- against a coronavirus in man or beast is also fact.  That is not due to the lack of attempt; there have been many attempts.  All have ended in failure; either the protection is non-durable and thus becomes a "required subscription" or worse, it turns on the inoculated individual member of the population and potentiates illness, severely injuring or killing them.  Attempting to force that model on the human population through lies or worse, mandates, marks every person involved in advocating or attempting to impose same worthy of immediate imprisonment or even execution as they are wild-eyed extortionists at best or even mass-murdering psychotic criminals.

That every respiratory pandemic in history has progressed into an endemic disease is scientific fact.  If it was not, even once, every single one of us would not exist because somewhere before our birth humans would have all been dead.  Yet here we are, which is scientific proof that any claim that Covid-19 would not follow the same pattern absent our intervention was and is false.  That is not to say that certain pathogens haven't been worse than others; there have, of course.  But the trend toward endemicity and immunity from serious outcome via infection or the mimicry of actual infection, not genetic engineering which only now exists as possible, is fact.  Thus my commentary, which I have repeated relentlessly: We are all going to get this thing, there's nothing we can do about that, and we ought to work on personal resistance to serious outcomes which we know we can have positive impact upon.  Indeed, were Covid-19 to have occurred prior to our obsession with obesity and "healthy at any size" it is probable that 99% of those who have died from it in the US would have successfully fought it off and it would have been less serious than seasonal influenza.

Your propensity to commit suicide whether through booze, drugs or alleged "food" does not and must never compel me to act in any form or fashion.  I may pity you and blithely allow that whatever alleged "good" you think you get from that is personal choice but the risk thereof is also your personal choice.  I know people who drink in amounts I believe are excessive and in fact two people in my social circle over the years are dead from having done so but its not my place to ban production of beer because they might see me drink one and want six; it is their decision and if you hold freedom to have any value then consenting adults are free to do as they wish in that regard.  The vast majority of those dead as a result of Covid-19 infection made themselves wildly more-likely to die -- by a factor of 10, 100 or even a thousand or more.  That some people had a run of bad luck and became more-vulnerable changes nothing; I am not responsible for that either as I did not cause said bad luck.

You are facing monstrous heating bills this winter because you consented to and many of you repeated a lie.  You allowed coal-fired power plants to be shut down when they are perfectly capable of providing all the power you need.  Texas got a small taste of their stupidity in reliance on "renewables" which have never been defensible on a thermodynamic perspective as a replacement and never will be due to physics.  I remind you that physics does not present suggestions, it is in fact a system of natural laws you cannot alter.  Ten years ago I put forward a means to address our energy requirements that was viable on both physics and capacity to execute.  While it had the virtue of also reducing carbon emissions that was not the goal and in fact did not inform my position in any way; stability and sustainability were the first, second, third and last mandate, as they must be if you intend to have a stable, growing economy since behind every unit of economic output is a unit of energy.  We instead turned off reliable sources and promoted unreliable, expensive ones.  Last winter the screwing impacted a relatively short period of time and a relatively-confined area of the nation.  This winter it may well be worse as we've continued down the road of stupidity and the embracing of lies.  People like Greta are either ignorant of the relationship between energy and the economy and thus are unqualified in the first instance to speak on the matter or intend to slaughter you.  We are talking about people who deliberately advocated for and acted to destroy perfectly-functional electrical generating and gas pipeline infrastructure in favor of unreliable "replacements" that were directly responsible for both severe property damage and death -- and will be again.

Likewise you are facing supply shortages and sky high inflation because of lies.  It is a fact that inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomena.  You sucked off Donald Trump when Covid hit and went along with a lie -- that the government could pay you to sit at home and suck down bong hits without causing ruinous inflation, and that you could shut down business and commerce without destroying supply chains that would take months, even years to restart and clear.  Having done that you let Biden continue to sell lies.  Whether Democrat or Republican you refused to demand that stop, despite hundreds of years of economic history proving that these policies would be ruinous as not one single example exists through recorded history of their application not having said ruinous outcome.

So what of accountability?

What prevents you from demanding same and enforcing accountability right here, right now?

Only one thing: Your repeated refusal to accept truth and refuse lies.

It is the truth that there more than 100 ordinary citizens for each one of those who would oppress within any area of government. You grossly outnumber them and, provided you are willing to use surprise it is impossible for them to escape your imposition of accountability.

It is the truth that all claimed "law" rests on the preposition that 99+% of the population voluntarily consents.  It is mathematically impossible to imprison any more than a tiny fraction of the population; we imprison more than any other nation on a percentage basis and have increased that by more than five times since 1971 yet even so less than 1% of our population is in fact in jail or prison.  The threat to lock you up or worse is empty the moment even a few percent of the population decides it is.

It is the truth that about 4,000 bank robberies are committed each year in the US.  If 1% of the population committed just one bank robbery each per year that would be over 3 million bank robberies, nearly a thousand times more, and it would be impossible to stop said "crimes"; that specific law would instantly cease to be enforceable.

It is the truth that everyone dies exactly once and that at the moment another person acts in such a fashion you are convinced you will be dead as a consequence of their action there is no punishment that can be leveled against you should you decide to personally impose accountability for that act upon them.  Once you accept that you are dead you can only make the situation better by your actions from that instant forward in time.  Failure from that point in time forward has no price yet success has a reward.

The Jews were exterminated in Germany because they bought into the lie that they could be compelled and essentially 100% of them believed that lie.  They were not compelled to disarm and in fact consented.  Once you go too far down the road of consent you can't change your mind and meaningfully impact the outcome but that does not change the essential nature of what happened or why.  Had the Jews decided, as soon as the persecution started, to go hunt down a Nazi Party member's family and burn their home, or simply to make sure some of those who came on the early raids never returned to their wife and kids until that crap ceased it would have stopped.  There were simply too many Jews and not enough Nazis, particularly if they acted individually without coordination as detecting who's going to do so in advance becomes impossible.  Yes, some would have died but that beats all of them dying, doesn't it?  If you wait until there's a machine gun pointed at you or you've been routed into a camp and are now awaiting your turn in the shower you waited too long.  Note that few who espouse Never Forget take the next step and by refusing to do so they embrace and espouse lies rather than the truthYou can stop an incipient event of this sort but you must do so well before the boxcars show up -- and exactly never is the correct action to stop such an event "harsh language" or "voting."

A Girl in Iowa was murdered because you let the illegal invaders in and to this day you allow them to stay.  That is also why a woman was raped on the train in Philadelphia by another illegal invader.  You are responsible for both that murder and the recent rape because it has always been and is today within your power to compel every single one of those people to leave this nation.  You can do so via peaceful means or not but I remind you that******is not peaceful and as such your refusal to so-insist means you are either a coward or co-conspirator in that violence as you are unwilling to demand the politicians, businesspeople and police eject these people under pain of very bad things happening to them, and since you refused to do that said woman had a very bad thing happen to her.  That Mollie Tibbetts' parents excused the slaughter of their own daughter and refused to demand the expulsion of every single illegal invader from this nation is one of the most outrageous things I have witnessed as an adult.  Mollie is dead and this victim was raped because you all consented to these monsters being given effective pardons for their original crime of illegally entering the country instead of insisting they leave now.  For a gallon of milk that is a dime cheaper you sold those victims -- and that's a fact.

You have allowed your children to be muzzled and deprived of human interaction for more than a year and a half; this has extended to deliberately harming or even destroying their education over that period of time.  This is despite our scientific knowledge that the current respiratory viral threat almost never kills or seriously harms our youth.  Yes, there are exceptions but said exceptions are more-rare than RSV, Influenza or a whole host of other maladies and events that harm children.  In short you did this and allow it to continue to this day, as the CDC's Walensky has now made clear they intend to never drop because you are scared, not for them but for yourself.  Rather than take responsibility for your own vulnerability such that it may be, whether great or small, you laid it off on those who through physical size and mental immaturity are unable to defend themselves against your aggression.  Now you are sitting by silently while the government and business propose to jab persons with an unproven technology that we know does not prevent infection when said persons are, on a statistical basis, effectively never seriously harmed by the virus itself.  This is in stark contrast to inoculations such as for measles which in fact does kill kids.  Your refusal to demand this stop and enforce said demand by whatever means are necessary if you are a parent of said child marks you as a child exploiter and abuser and that makes clear you are a monster.

You allowed over one hundred thousand Americans to be deprived of the care and comfort of their loved ones for months when nursing homes were locked down and other care denied.  You can't make those people whole or repay them because they're dead; you took the last months and weeks of their lives away from them and turned them into prisoners despite them committing no offense whatsoever.  You are monsters for allowing this to occur.

The simple fact of the matter is that there is no means to force the population to consent to any law, provided even a tiny percentage, well under 10% and in fact in virtually every case less than one percent, are willing to make it ridiculously and personally expensive in wealth or treasure for those who would impose same upon society.  The premise that one must be "organized" to resist is false and is promoted by those who want you to get into the boxcar.  Indeed organization is where tyranny flows from, whether corporately or from government.  It is the tool of the tyrant who can infiltrate or misdirect organization and is thwarted by unorganized individuals of like mind as there is no way to know in advance of their action who said persons are.  Witness the "Tea Party" which was infiltrated and destroyed within months by turning what was a legitimate point of protest -- "Taxed Enough Already" -- into guns, gays and God at which point it just became another right-wing nutjob snake-handling congregation to be ignored, attacked, and ultimately faded off into obscurity.

What if, instead, five or ten percent of the people who were imbued with refusing had decided that whatever they were aggrieved about was going to stop?  The word "should" that so many spineless, worthless so-called "conservatives" espouse on this issue or that becomes banished and is replaced with SHALL.  What option does government have if there is a general strike, picket line or even embargo around the means of production and delivery?  Witness Italy where it is happening now. The media is ignoring this on purpose because they know damned well that it can trivially spread worldwide -- including right here in the United States.  What does government do in response?  Shoot?  That's a losing proposition and they know it as once you demonstrate that you will shoot the homes and businesses of all sympathizers of the government position may as well paint targets on their front doors, assuming the people are willing to exact accountability.

If you want to know why Southwest and others are threatening but, when faced with even a few percent of those who say "**** You" they back off this is why.  They're still trying to be too cute by half as you have not sent the message that you will destroy them corporately and personally unless they cut it out entirely and in fact make clear that there will never be another instance in threat or deed.  Thus the attempt to thread the needle: They know damned well that a hungry man or woman who they just dispossessed has no reason to be nice and even if a couple of percent of the population decides they will exact accountability then the imposing entity loses.

There are those who say "well, but the Karens outnumber us!"  That doesn't matter.  Again, the basic reality of life in any modern society is that well more than 99% of the people must agree to voluntarily comply with any law, not 50.1%.  There is simply no means of meaningful enforcement beyond that point if the dissenters are willing to make those on the other side pay personally.

Witness the medical scam over the last 30+ years, all of it illegal under 15 USC Chapter 1, and twice being ruled illegal by the USSC.  Yet it continues daily.  Why?  Because you let it continue.  The day even 1 or 2% of the population decides to exact accountability if the law is not followed it ends and so does your impoverishment, suffering and death at their hands.

The Reeeeeeing Karen cannot force compliance -- she must deal with the reality that only via effectively-universal consent does policy advance just as you must, begrudgingly or otherwise, acknowledge the same thing.  The point of agreement is never 50.1% if either side of the debate is willing to exact accountability on a personal level -- as soon as one side takes that position and means it the point of agreement that must be reached shifts to 99% or better.

It is simply a matter of mathematics and mathematics is, like physics, a function of laws, not suggestions.

You have all the power -- every bit of it -- as soon as you decide to assert it and refuse repression.

Use it in accordance with what the Founding Fathers put forward -- for good, not evil -- but do not believe for a second that the differentiation between good and evil comes as a result of consent to evil and lies.  It does not, as both Mollie Tibbetts and the woman on the train in Philadelphia, along with countless others including virtually every child in this nation, has discovered the hard way. 

The Biblical Structure of History: Preface - by Gary North

 A. Benefits of Reading This Book

I wrote this book so that a hard core of Christian leaders and prospective leaders will read it and then will act on what they have read. Leaders act representatively. Action is crucial to all forms of leadership: in households, churches, and everywhere else. Knowledge alone is insufficient for meaningful change, either personally or institutionally. We must act in terms of what we believe. But, before we act, we had better count the cost. Jesus said: “For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish” (Luke 14:28–30).

Maybe you do not want to be a leader. You are a leader anyway. If you are a parent, you are a leader. Parents teach their children. If you make decisions on behalf of others, you are a leader. Basic to all forms of leadership is the knowledge of history. Every organization has a history. Successful leaders must know something about the past of the organizations in which they possess God-given responsibility. They need to know how they got into the positions they occupy. They need to know something about the successes and failures of previous leaders.

Why should you start reading this book? Why should you finish reading it? Because you are the heir to a great gift: Christian civilization. It began on the day Adam was created (Genesis 1:26). It will not end on the day of judgment (Matthew 25). It will extend into eternity (Revelation 21, 22). You owe God thanks. The more you know about the history of Christian civilization, the more thanks you will owe. He who has received more from God owes more to God. “There was a certain creditor which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty. And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him most? Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged” (Luke 7:41–43).

This debt includes your present knowledge of God’s dealings with His people through the ages. The Bible is filled mostly with stories of God’s dealings with His people. You know some of them. You know about God and Adam, Cain and Abel, Noah and the flood. You know about David and Solomon. You may not be able to identify when they lived, but you know that historical time is linear. It had a beginning, and it will have an end: the final judgment. This structure gives meaning to Bible stories.

You also know stories about Jesus. These stories are central to your faith. You know about His resurrection from the dead. Paul put this event at the center of Christian faith. “And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain” (1 Corinthians 15:14). Then he said it again: “And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins” (v. 17). If you are wise, you know about the men of faith described in Hebrews 11. They are role models for Christians in every era.

More than any other religion except Judaism, Christianity is a religion based on history. Yet Christians are remarkably ignorant about the history of the church. They are even more ignorant about the culture-transforming effects of the church. Even if they know a little about a few key figures in the history of the church, they cannot explain exactly why these people were important in the history of Western civilization. They cannot tell you what difference these people made outside of the institutional church. They have no understanding of the relationship between the church’s teachings and historical progress.

One of the reasons for this ignorance is that humanistic historians ever since the Renaissance have dominated the profession of historical storytellers. They have written stories about the history of the church prior to 1500. These stories have been almost universally negative. There has been some recent improvement in the accuracy of the humanists’ accounts of the history of Christianity, but not enough. Humanists have written the history textbooks. Textbooks on the history of Western civilization have focused on the historical impact of the rediscovery of Greek and Roman historical documents and sculpture that took place after about 1350, and especially after the Turks captured Constantinople in 1453, when Greek refugees came west with copies of ancient Greek documents and the ability to teach. Humanist historians labeled the early history of the church “the dark ages.” They also labeled the history of the West up to about 1350 as “the Middle Ages.” The middle of what? The middle of civilization between the fall of Rome in 476 A.D. and the advent of the Renaissance.

In this book, I explain the nature of the intellectual warfare between two irreconcilable theories of history and two traditions of writing about history. The first is the Christian concept of history. The second is humanism’s concept of history. Both groups have adopted similar organizational categories for understanding history, but their presuppositions are radically opposed. I discuss this conflict of visions in terms of the rivalry between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of man. I show why you and generations of Christians before you have been deliberately misinformed about the history of Western civilization.

This book will take time to read. You will have to pay attention to some of the details. I have done my best to structure the book to make it readable, but there is no substitute for paying attention. We tell this to our children when they are young. Our children tend not to pay much attention to the warning. I hope you do.

B. The Origin of This Book

In 1975, I persuaded R. J. Rushdoony to use funds raised by his nonprofit foundation, Chalcedon, to publish a scholarly book honoring Christian philosopher Cornelius Van Til, who taught apologetics—the philosophical defense of the faith—at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia. Rushdoony had been an intellectual disciple of Van Til’s ever since 1947, when he read The New Modernism (1947), Van Til’s critique of Karl Barth and Emil Brunner, the European neo-orthodox theologians who denied the historical accuracy of the Bible’s narratives. I had taken an introductory apologetics course from Van Til in the fall of 1963. Rushdoony agreed to the project. I then recruited authors who were followers of Van Til intellectually. Each wrote at least one article about a specific academic discipline.

I wrote the article on sociology and the article on economics. Yet my Ph.D. was in history. I decided that the best person to write the article on history was professor C. Gregg Singer of Catawba College. His 1964 book, A Theological Interpretation of American History, was unique. In 1975, Arlington House published his history of the National Council of Churches: The Unholy Alliance. In 1979, his next major book appeared: From Rationalism to Irrationality: The Decline of the Western Mind from the Renaissance to the Present (1979).

Singer was not a well-known historian in secular academic circles, but he was a superior historian. Catawba College was a small Christian college in a small town in rural North Carolina. He did not have ready access to a major research library. But he had a worldview that enabled him to write cogent books on major topics. That was why I invited him to contribute an article. He agreed. The book appeared in 1976: Foundations of Christian Scholarship: Essays in the Van Til Perspective. It was published by Rushdoony’s book publishing company, Ross House Books.

Singer’s essay was titled “The Problem of Historical Interpretation.” He began his essay with this paragraph:

Some five years ago at an annual meeting of the American Historical Association the writer had the occasion to meet informally with a group of the more famous historians in attendance at that conference. The subject under discussion was the meaning and purpose of history. These half-dozen scholars were of the opinion that history lacks any decisive meaning and any discernible purpose. The writer then posed to this group of distinguished scholars one question: If this be the case, then why do we teach history? The scholars looked at him with surprise and even disgust, but no answer was forthcoming from any of them. The group broke up as each went to his own particular luncheon group and discussion of various phases of a subject which they could not really justify as part of a college curriculum and yet which they continue to teach as if the knowledge of it had some inherent value.

In the second paragraph, he drew a conclusion regarding the world of humanist academia:

This incident is by no means unique. The professional historians in this country and in Europe have come to the place where they have little faith in the subject to which they have devoted their lives. Historians with increasing and distressing frequency are openly admitting that history has no meaning and shows little or no purpose or goals. But neither is this anti-intellectual attitude peculiar to the professional historians. The existentialist and positive philosophies have entered into the thinking of most areas of human thought and activity with devastating results. In conjunction with the Freudian school in psychology, they have made irrationalism and anti-intellectualism fashionable and have virtually removed the concepts of purpose and meaning from the thinking of many historians and those who proclaim themselves to be “social scientists.”

His assessment was correct. Leading historians in 1970 no longer had faith that history reveals any authoritative meaning or purpose. This lack of faith is far more widespread today. It had been building for half a century before Singer wrote his essay. Yet this pessimism regarding the relevancy of historical research and publication has in no way slowed the publication of arcane articles in professional historical journals. Historians continue to write these articles, despite the fact that the articles are rarely quoted by other historians or even read by them. Then why write? They do it to keep their jobs in major universities if they do not have tenure, and to get job offers if they are stuck in colleges with poor academic reputations and low pay. In 1970, publishing journal articles was the way that untenured assistant professors became tenured associate professors and full professors—in every field in the humanities and social sciences.

When the acknowledged leaders in any profession begin to doubt its legitimacy, that profession borders on the fringes of irrelevancy. In the case of the academic discipline known as history, the number of students willing to major in the field has steadily declined. There are so few high school teaching opportunities available to graduates with B.A. degrees in history that the number of students willing to take two years of upper division courses has declined. In 2017, 15 million students attended American colleges. In that year, fewer than 25,000 history degrees were awarded, down from over 36,000 in 2008. The number of history majors declined by two-thirds from 1969 to 1985. (Colleen Flaherty, “The Vanishing History Major,” Inside Higher Education [November 27, 2018].

There was a time in American history when history courses were part of the core curriculum in both high schools and colleges. In high school in the late 1950's, I took a one-year course in world history and one-year course in American history. At the University of California, Riverside in the 1960's, a one-year course in Western civilization was required for graduation. That academic world is long gone. In 2020, an article was published by Forbes, a business site: “Who’s Afraid of Western Civ?” Here are the numbers: “By 2011, none of the 50 top U.S. universities required Western Civilization, and 34 didn’t even offer the course. Nationwide, only 17% of colleges require Western Civ, and only 18% require American history or government.” The turning point came on January 15, 1987 at Stanford University, when 500 students and a visiting celebrity, Rev. Jesse Jackson, demonstrated against a required course in Western culture. Their chant received national publicity by the media: “Hey, hey, ho, ho, Western civ has got to go!” The faculty took the hint. It dropped the course in 1989. (A long, carefully documented article on the rise and fall of the Western Civilization curriculum was published in 2020 by the National Association of Scholars: “The Lost History of Western Civilization,” by Stanley Kurtz.

Singer made it clear in 1976 that the academic discipline of history was in a state of crisis. He blamed the presuppositions of secular humanism. Unfortunately, he never wrote a book on the purpose and meaning of history. His article offered no insights regarding an explicitly Christian way of interpreting and writing history. He was therefore in the distressing position of trying to beat something with nothing. Nevertheless, his essay serves as an introduction to Van Til’s writings on history and historiography. This book fills in the details.

C. The Nature of the Crisis

In Part 2 of this book, I go into the details of the crisis in modern historiography. I became aware of this crisis in my senior year of college, 1962–63. I took a course in historiography in the second semester. The history department required history majors to take this course. Had it not been required, it is doubtful that many students would have enrolled. I was an exception. I was interested in questions regarding epistemology, the philosophical study of what people can know and how they can know it. I had been reading the works of economist Ludwig von Mises for two years. Also, beginning in the fall of 1962, Rushdoony began sending me spiral-bound syllabi written by Van Til for his students. What I did not know was this: in 1962, Van Til had written a multi-volume mimeographed syllabus, Christianity in Conflict. It was a history of Christian apologetics from the second century onward. His contention was this: the early church began a tradition which undermined the testimony of the church, namely, the use of Greek philosophy as a way to defend the teachings of the church and the legitimacy of the gospel. In Part I of that syllabus, Van Til devoted six pages to an analysis of a book by R. G. Collingwood, The Idea of History. Van Til had correctly identified the scholar who was arguably the major humanist philosopher of history in the mid-twentieth century. Singer relied on Van Til’s critique to write his article.

In that course, I read two anthologies of essays on the philosophy of history and the writing of history. Two of the essayists, Carl Becker and Charles Beard, had delivered presidential addresses to the American Historical Association in the early 1930's. These articles were included in one of the anthologies. I discuss them in Chapters 8 and 9. In most of the materials on the meaning of history written after 1920, historians presented some version of historical relativism. They were in reaction against the ideal of late-nineteenth century historians: the objective interpretation of history. This had been called scientific history. Any claim of scientific precision and authority was not taken seriously by leading historians after 1920.

A neglected cause of this loss of faith in objective history was the rise of the Copenhagen school of physics in the 1920's: quantum physics. That movement had declared that the realm of subatomic physics is not governed by the same Newtonian laws of cause and effect that govern the realm of atoms, where you and I live. This change of view began to affect the social sciences. One influential scholar who understood the impact of quantum physics outside of physics departments was Roscoe Pound, who was Dean of the Harvard Law School from 1916 to 1937. After this, he became a University Professor at Harvard. In 1940, he wrote this in his book, Contemporary Juristic Theory: “Nothing has been so upsetting to political and juristic thinking as the growth of the idea of contingency in physics. It has taken away the analogy from which philosophers had reached the very idea of law. It has deprived political and juristic thought of the pattern to which they had conceived of government and law as set up. Physics had been the rock on which they had built” (p. 34). Physics was no longer a reliable rock in 1930. I discussed this reconstruction of Newtonian physics in Chapter 1 of my book, Is The World Running Down? Crisis in the Christian Worldview (1988).

. . . God created the world, and then He created man to exercise dominion over it (Gen. 1:26–28). Man’s mind comprehends his environment—not perfectly, but adequately for a creature responsible before God to exercise dominion in God's name. It is only because mankind has this interpretive ability that science can exist. Even more crucial, it is only because God created and actively, providentially sustains this universe that science can exist.

Few Christians have been told that without three key doctrines that stem directly from Christian theology, modern science could not have been developed: first, the creation of the universe by a totally transcendent God out of nothing; second, the sustaining providence of God; third, linear (straight line) history. The pagan world, including Greece and Rome, did not believe these doctrines, and it did not develop theoretical science. Similarly, both Chinese and Islamic science failed to carry through on their hopeful beginnings in science because they rejected a Christian worldview. Because the West believed in these three doctrines, modern science became possible.

Because modern man has abandoned all three of these doctrines, modern science has become increasingly irrational, despite its tremendous advancement. As the experiments become more precise, physicists have lost faith in the coherence of the universe. The twentieth century has abandoned the stable, rational worldview of late-nineteenth-century physical science (pp. 13–14).

What I wrote about modern natural science in 1988, I am writing about modern historiography in this book. The problem is the same—skepticism—because the cause is the same: the abandonment of a worldview that affirms the possibility of objective knowledge. The twenty-first century is increasingly an era of subjectivism. This started in the late-nineteenth century, and it accelerated after World War I. In his book, Twilight of Authority (1975), Robert Nisbet observed:

Twilight periods are rich in manifestations of subjectivity, and our own is no exception. The retreat to inner consciousness that began in literature at the very beginning of the century, but which was offset for a long time by still-powerful currents of objectivity, has become a major phenomenon in the cultural setting of the present, and may be seen not only in literature and the fine arts, but in substantial areas of the social sciences, philosophy, and, variously, in the wide range of popular therapeutic explorations of self. This subjectivity would be less significant if it were not associated with what has become an enlarging distrust of reason and science in some of the areas of inquiry which only recently have become accepted in the terms of rationalism (pp. 139–40).

As I explain in Part 2, the spread of subjectivism has steadily undermined humanistic historians’ trust in the meaningfulness of their research and the research of their peers. This subjectivism is an inescapable result of the academic world’s rejection of biblical creationism. It assumes a rival view of origins: impersonal, purposeless, meaningless cosmic evolution.


I have learned after six decades of experience in teaching, primarily on the printed page and the computer screen, that it is more effective to start with a presentation of what is correct before launching into detailed criticisms of what is incorrect. The old saying is true: you can’t beat something with nothing. It is best to begin with something, and especially something true. This is why I devote Part 1 to a presentation of the biblical foundations of history and also historiography. These five covenantal categories are foundational to the study of society: sovereignty, authority, law, sanctions, and succession. The Bible identifies the content of these five categories in the realm of history: creationism, the image of God in man, biblical law, God’s imputation of meaning, and cultural inheritance over time.

In Part 2, I survey humanism’s rival construct. Humanist historians rely on the same five categories in their pursuit of an understanding of the past—sovereignty, authority, law, sanctions, and succession—but they substitute different content in four of the five: evolution, autonomy, relativism, and nominalism. On the fifth point, succession, they remain silent. It is too depressing: entropy—the heat death of the again purposeless universe. (See Chapter 10.)

In Part 3, I discuss how and why Christian historians must reconstruct the epistemological foundations of their field from the bottom up, and then begin to produce historical studies that are consistent with the Christian worldview regarding the structure of history. There is such a worldview. The fact that Christian historians have ignored it for so long has undermined their understanding of historical development. They have adopted too much of the humanists’ covenant model, which is implicit in the history profession’s university screening system that certifies professional competence. But there is no formal university course in presuppositions in any academic discipline. At most, there are courses in methodology, which never mention the presuppositions that undergird the professors’ worldview. But the humanists’ presuppositions exist, and they shape the thinking of most professional historians.

Free Course: The Biblical Structure of History - by Gary North


If you have ever wondered why high school and college textbooks on American history are so far to the left, this course will explain it.

I decided to major in history in the fall of 1960. That was 61 years ago. Time flies.

I decided in early September I would write a book on the biblical structure history. Yes, there is such a structure. No, you did not read about it if you went to a Christian college and majored in history. Your professor did not know.

I finished the book yesterday. Now I am going to publish it, chapter by chapter, every day. In this format, it will serve as a course. I will publish it as a book next year. I will have to index it. I hate to index.

The link to each lesson will be posted underneath the box containing the latest articles. It will take a month for me to post all of the lessons.

Here is the page on which the daily lessons will be posted.

Friday, October 22, 2021

DaJabber Report – the Covid Cabal is Satanic to its Core!

Quick review:

The method - And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.2 Corinthians 11:14

The hook – DaCovid Cabal promises both health and life – They LIED!

The deceived – If your life and health becomes your god……it IS!

Then Jesus told His disciples, “If anyone wants to come after Me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.  - Matthew 16:25


Read more: Are We Governed by Humans?

Satan’s servants – both inside and outside of the church – are human actors………. We are governed not by good people with bad ideas; we are governed by servants of Satan.


Now the ugly truth - and it truly is uglier than we can even imagine!


America’s Frontline Doctors agree: murdered infants at the heart of vaccine research - by Jon Rappoport

The old Nazi program in new clothing

“Not only are the babies delivered alive, horrifically, their organs are often removed when they are still alive. This is how they got the HEK293 kidney cells used in the manufacture of the vaccines and why Pfizer wanted it to remain a secret…”

Full text: - So he lied? Isn't that part of the job description?


The murdered infant comes to the virology lab; the ivory tower is befouled - In a groundbreaking article for Children of God For Life, titled “Forsaking God For the Sake of Science,” [1] [1b] Debra Vinnedge outlines how the Rockefeller-Harriman eugenics movement gave rise to the practice of medical abortions for research purposes, including live births during which the infant was murdered and its organs harvested:

(Read this full text – and have a whoopee cup handy! - CL)



Why are they doing this? Simple. The Elites are Neo-Malthusians and believe that we are overpopulated and that resource depletion will collapse civilization in a matter of a few short decades. They are not necessarily incorrect in this belief. We are overpopulated, and we are consuming too many resources. However, orchestrating such a gruesome and murderous power grab in response to a looming crisis demonstrates that they have nothing but the utmost contempt for their fellow man.

To those who are participating in this disgusting farce without any understanding of what they are doing, we have one word for you. Stop. You are causing irreparable harm to your country and to your fellow citizens.

To those who may be reading this warning and have full knowledge and understanding of what they are doing and how it will unjustly harm millions of innocent people, we have a few more words.

Damn you to hell. You will not destroy America and the Free World, and you will not have your New World Order. We will make certain of that.


It’s Time To Disobey Covid Mandates

Laws contrary to the human good are not only false laws, but acts of violence against the human person which can be disobeyed.


J’Accuse! The Gene-based “Vaccines” Are Killing People. Governments Worldwide Are Lying to You the People, to the Populations They Purportedly Serve


It All Makes Sense Once You Realize They Want to Kill Us

As for the mass vaccination campaign, it is the most maniacally-genocidal project ever concocted by man. There’s simply no way to calculate the amount of suffering and death we are about to face for trusting people whose policies were obviously shaped by their undiluted hatred of humanity. As German microbiologist Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi said:

“In the end, we’re going to see mass illness and deaths among people who normally would have had wonderful lives ahead of them.”

It is a great tragedy.

Thursday, October 21, 2021

America’s Frontline Doctors agree: murdered infants at the heart of vaccine research - by Jon Rappoport

The old Nazi program in new clothing

“Not only are the babies delivered alive, horrifically, their organs are often removed when they are still alive. This is how they got the HEK293 kidney cells used in the manufacture of the vaccines and why Pfizer wanted it to remain a secret…”

by Jon Rappoport

October 21, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

The article at America’s Frontline Doctors’ website is headlined: “Aborted Fetal Cells and Vaccines—A Scandal Much Bigger Than Pfizer’s Whistleblower Ever Imagined,” by Caryn Lipson, October 18, 2021.

I’m going to quote from the article extensively and then add my comments.

“Recently, Pfizer whistleblower Melissa Strickler, a manufacturing quality auditor for the company, exposed some of their internal emails. She was horrified by the information they contained and spoke with Project Veritas about what she had uncovered – the use of fetal cells from aborted babies to test their COVID-19 vaccine. This is some of what top management wrote:”

“’From the perspective of corporate affairs,’ [Pfizer Senior Director of Worldwide Research Vanessa] Gelman wrote in one email, ‘we want to avoid having the information on fetal cells floating out there … The risk of communicating this right now outweighs any potential benefit we could see, particularly with general members of the public who may take this information and use it in ways we may not want out there’.”

“In another email exchange between Advait Badkar, senior director of the Novel Delivery Technologies group within Pfizer’s Biotherapeutics Pharmaceutical Sciences organization, Gelman can be seen admitting to Badkar that, ‘One or more cell lines with an origin that can be traced back to human fetal tissue has been used in laboratory tests associated with the vaccine program’.”

“She warned him that, ‘We have been trying as much as possible to not mention the fetal cell lines’.”

“What Strickler wasn’t aware of is that the information about the fetal cells being used for the COVID-19 vaccine is well-known to scientists and researchers. Papers about the manufacturing techniques for COVID-19 vaccines, which included the use of fetal cells, were published online at least as far back as May 2020; she also didn’t know that she had uncovered only a small portion of a large scandal.”

“The fetal cells referred to in Pfizer’s emails were HEK293T cells, obtained from the kidney cells of a female fetus in 1973. In reality, all the currently authorized COVID-19 vaccines are made using aborted fetal cells, including Moderna’s. Moderna also used HEK293T cells in their proof-of-concept tests to see if the genetic instructions contained in these vaccines would be effectively taken up and produce the required spike protein.”

“Johnson and Johnson used both the PER.C6 cell line (derived from human embryonic retinal cells, originally from the retinal tissue of an 18-week-old fetus aborted in 1985) and the HEK293T cell line, to produce and assay (respectively) their Janssen adenovirus vaccine.”

“AstraZeneca used the HEK293T cells to develop theirs, as did two other companies that have had their vaccines approved, CanSino Biologics and Gamaleya Research Institute (Sputnik V vaccine).”

“The use of aborted fetal cells in vaccine production has been going on for over 50 years, starting in the mid-to late 1970s. Antigens for several childhood vaccines are grown in aborted fetal cell lines MRC-5 and WI-38. These cell lines are found in the vaccines and are included in CDC’s vaccine excipient list as well as Johns Hopkins Institute for Vaccine Safety website…”

“Fetal DNA and proteins are also found in the Covid-19 vaccines, at least for the ones which were developed, not just tested, in fetal cells. Genetic engineer, Dr. Theresa Deisher, explains that it is impossible to totally separate the antigen from the medium it is grown in…”

“The use of aborted fetal cells raises tremendous ethical, moral, and health concerns.”

“Dr. Stanley Plotkin, a renowned vaccinologist, was deposed in January 2018, by attorney Aaron Siri, prior to testifying in a divorce case, where the parents disagreed about vaccination. Plotkin has a very long list of credentials including Emeritus Professor of the University of Pennsylvania, and Adjunct Professor of the Johns Hopkins University. He has received numerous honors and has lectures named for him. He developed the rubella vaccine, is codeveloper of the pentavalent rotavirus vaccine, and has worked extensively on the development and application of other vaccines including anthrax, oral polio, rabies, varicella, and cytomegalovirus. He is now a consultant to vaccine manufacturers, biotechnology companies and non-profit research organizations as principal of Vaxconsult, LLC.”

“ [Plotkin:] ‘Because living tissue is needed for the primary culture, these abortions are often done by the “water bag” method which delivers the fetuses (between 2-4 months gestation) ALIVE. (Limbs, organs, and tissues from aborted fetuses are also a mainstay of modern medical research.) Included in vaccines for measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, shingles, rotavirus, adenovirus and rabies are human DNA fragments …’” [emphasis added]

“Not only are the babies delivered alive, horrifically, their organs are often removed when they are still alive. This is how they got the HEK293 kidney cells used in the manufacture of the vaccines and why Pfizer wanted it to remain a secret…”

—end of article excerpt—

Medically eliminate the unwanted.

These murderous crimes of infanticide are part and parcel of the Rockefeller eugenics movement, which took hold early in the 20th century, and involved, at the very least, the US, Germany, Canada, and Sweden.

And then, of course, the Nazi regime vastly expanded medical torture and killing of the unwanted in their concentration camps. The Nuremburg War Crimes trials, at the end of World War 2, failed to alert the whole world to the essentially MEDICAL basis of many of these crimes.

In other words, the Nazi doctors were not a lone aberration in an otherwise benign world of medical research. The whole modern medical structure was woven with inhuman and sadistic practices.

And still is.

I call to the attention of the Frontline Doctors the depth and breadth of a related open secret. I have reported on it many times.

Several key studies have revealed it.

The one study-review I have cited most often: Author Dr. Barbara Starfield, revered public health expert at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health; the Journal of the American Medical Association, July 26, 2000; “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?”

Starfield concluded that, in the US, medical doctors kill 225,000 people per year. 2.25 MILLION people per decade. 106,000 a year die as a result of the administration of FDA approved drugs. 119,000 a year die from mistreatment and errors in hospitals.

In an interview I conducted with Starfield in 2009, she stated that there had been no comprehensive government program to address and undo this horrific ongoing catastrophe; nor had she been consulted by government to plan a strategy for reforming the medical system.

This, despite the obvious fact that, after her review was published in 2000, and after other similar studies were published, MANY public health officials, politicians, journalists, doctors, heads of medical schools, pharmaceutical executives and researchers were well aware of the horrendous medically caused death toll.

Therefore, we are talking about negligent homicide, at the very least—and actually, much more than that.

There is a massive and diverse supply of medical drugs available for doctors to prescribe, and clearly many of these drugs are, in fact, experimental. Their certification and licensing by the FDA means nothing. They are deemed safe and effective, but they kill and maim.

This is precisely the crisis we are now facing with the release of COVID vaccines. They are experimental. They employ an RNA technology never imposed on the public before. The huge number of vaccine injuries and deaths piling up, worldwide, should come as no surprise.

When The People are viewed as guinea pigs, as expendable, even as unnecessary and unwanted, why wouldn’t soulless companies release one drug and vaccine after another, in an unending river, with no concern for the consequences?

And to ensure compliance in following “the dosage schedule”—why not lock populations in their homes, shut down their businesses, and announce and enforce mandates?

If researchers, technicians, doctors, and pharmaceutical executives are willing to murder infants for body parts in their cell-line machinations, what aren’t they willing to do?

Many independent journalists and investigators are essentially conducting our own Nuremburg War Crimes trials. We are doing it because government all over the world have already surrendered to the Medical Cartel.

In 1933, the largest cartel in the world, IG Farben, enabled Hitler’s rise to power. Farben: pharmaceuticals, dyes, chemicals, synthetics.

During WW2, Farben had prisoners shipped from Auschwitz to its nearby facility, where horrendous medical/pharmaceutical experiments were carried out on them.

For accounts, read The Devil’s Chemists, by Josiah DuBois, and The Crime and Punishment of IG Farben, by Joseph Borkin.

At the end of the War, Farben executives were put on trial and, despite the efforts of Telford Taylor, the chief US prosecutor, and assistant prosecutor, Josiah DuBois, the sentences handed out were light.

For example, Fritz Ter Meer, a high-ranking Farben executive, was tried for mass murder and slavery, and sentenced to a paltry seven years in jail. He was released after three years, and went on to occupy a post as chairman of the advisory board of Bayer, a “branch on the tree” of the nominally “disbanded” IG Farben.

During World War 2, Josiah Du Bois, representing the US federal government, had been sent on a fact-finding mission to Guatemala. His comment: “As far as I can tell the country is a wholly owned subsidiary of Farben.”

What Farben stood for was an attempt to remake the planet in terms of power.

Farben held important cards. It employed brilliant chemists who, in some ways, moved far ahead of its competitors. Farben was all about synthetics. Rubber, oil, dyes, pharmaceuticals.

More importantly, Farben saw itself as a modern version of the old alchemists: transforming one substance into another. It came to believe that, with enough time, it would be able to make “anything from anything.” It envisioned labs in which basic chemical facts of the universe would be changed so that, in practice, elements would be virtually interchangeable.

This paralleled the Nazi obsession to discover the lost secrets of the mythical Aryan race and then reconstitute it with selective breeding, genetic engineering, and of course the mass murder of “lesser peoples.”

On one level, there was the idea of chemical transformations, and on another level, the transformation of the human species.

Today’s pharmaceutical giants are mainly spin-offs of the old Farben, or former close collaborators. They design myriad drugs and vaccines that maim and kill and pacify and debilitate (and therefore control) populations; and they also now labor to produce new cutting edge techniques to genetically modify and transform the human species.

Combining these efforts with Big Tech, and its mad efforts to make over humans into brain-computer hybrids—known as transhumanism—we are witnessing the old Farben-Nazi plan, still very much alive, in a new updated form.

Medical experimentation and murder are one branch of the poisonous tree.

Resisting and overthrowing the global vaccine mandate is one step toward demolishing the future which has been laid out for us on a diabolical table.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALEDEXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.