A Turning Point for the USA

There have been several, just in my lifetime.  The assassination of JFK is probably the most important one, because it opened the way for the others: September 11 and the nothing-to-see-here Epstein files are two other rather obvious such turning points – maybe better to call these inflection points of greater acceleration…but that would kind of mess up the use of my title to this post.

Charlie Kirk was assassinated.  Did I even need to write that this event is what has prompted this post, given the title?  Many thoughts come to mind, but I will stick to a couple of quotes from Angelo Codevilla, who I have written about often over the last several years – even before Trump’s first election nine years ago.  So, here goes.

This he wrote even before Trump’s first victory in 2016:

We have stepped over the threshold of a revolution. It is difficult to imagine how we might step back, and futile to speculate where it will end. Our ruling class’s malfeasance, combined with insult, brought it about. Donald Trump did not cause it and is by no means its ultimate manifestation. Regardless of who wins in 2016, this revolution’s sentiments will grow in volume and intensity, and are sure to empower politicians likely to make Americans nostalgic for Donald Trump’s moderation.

This from a few weeks after Trump’s first inauguration:

Hear me…you see the entire ruling class essentially rejecting the Constitution, the American way, rejecting the legitimacy of elections.  There can be no mild response to that, and there isn’t one.  Trump’s voters want certain results and they don’t particularly care how they get them.  The ruling class wants its power and doesn’t particularly care how it holds on to it.

This also from around the same time:

In short, the P.C. “changes in law and public norms” (to quote Galston again) that the ruling class imposed on the rest of America, rather than having “gradually brought about changes in private attitudes across partisan and ideological lines” as the ruling class imagined (and as Gramsci would have approved) have set off a revolution—of which we can be sure only that it won’t be pretty.

What do all of these have to do with Charlie Kirk?  (Oh, and let’s not forget the image of a young Ukrainian female refugee knifed while on public transit in Charlotte, and the reaction this has caused.)

Charlie Kirk was just talking.  He held no involuntary authority over anyone.  No one was forced to do as he said, or even to listen to him.  He was not a politician; he did not manipulate the suffering masses to be pawns in his game. 

He was just talking.

No, I didn’t agree with him on everything, but he moved the conversation in America in a better direction, and he did it the way it should be done – by just talking.

Charlie Kirk was to be just such a voice for the next forty years.  Now?  We get to hear mainstream media talk about how he supported gun rights so he kind of deserved it, just a few days after they told us that the system failed the black man who came up behind a white woman and stabbed her.  And, by the way, here is the background of the system that failed him.

Someday, true conservatives (not the ones who merely wear the “R” label out of convenience, or the ones that support some tiny speck in the Middle East no matter what) are going to decide that Trump’s “moderation” is not going to get the result they want, and they want their results and don’t particularly care how they get them; it most certainly will not be pretty.

They know how to shoot back, and they are way better at it.  And, even though much of what they do is destructive, most people in the military and in law enforcement lean conservative and not kooky.

With that said, all of us are being set up by the elite written of by Codevilla. 

Conclusion

A 31-year-old young man, a husband, a father of two, was assassinated for talking.  This word combination can’t be real, but it is.

Christ or chaos.  We each face this choice in our personal lives, and as a society the choice is no different.  I pray we move toward Christ, but it seems we are being ever-increasingly pushed (manipulated) toward chaos.

Can America be MGA*?

 

*Made Great Again

There are two, only two, dynamics at work here: the truth and its opposite, pragmatism, or whatever works.

We need to raise our sights, to stop being obsessed with what is happening right now, and to see the future of mankind: peace, prosperity, and love on a world-wide scale because we have been influenced by His Spirit to treat our neighbor as we would wish to be treated BY our neighbor.

When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace. There is no other way.

-          Roger

I have been thinking about this comment from Roger to my post, Quo Vadis MAGA? In that post, I discussed what is happening geopolitically through the lens of the Heartland Theory posited by Halford Mackinder about 120 years ago, and I used that lens to consider which way America is going under Trump and just what does he mean by “Make America Great Again.”  (Go back to the post to see what might be meant by this phrase that can mean almost anything.)

I used the post to take a step back, considering the confusion that is the Trump presidency.  And, by stepping back maybe getting some clarity – or at least reminding myself of the geopolitical lens through which I see world events playing out.

Roger’s comment has me thinking that I need to take a further step back – call it the ultimate step back – and ask: Can America be Made Great Again?  And to answer this question – to offer the ultimate and unassailable answer, there is only one source to use.

Jeremiah 18: 11 “Now therefore, speak to the men of Judah and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, ‘Thus says the Lord: “Behold, I am fashioning a disaster and devising a plan against you. Return now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good.”’” 12 And they said, “That is hopeless! So we will walk according to our own plans, and we will every one obey the dictates of his evil heart.”

This sounds like America today.

17 I will scatter them as with an east wind before the enemy; I will show them the back and not the face in the day of their calamity.”

God showing the back and not the face is one of the most damning statements He makes.

2 Kings 17: 14 Nevertheless they would not hear, but stiffened their necks, like the necks of their fathers, who did not believe in the Lord their God.

This also sounds like America today.

18 Therefore the Lord was very angry with Israel, and removed them from His sight; there was none left but the tribe of Judah alone.

Being removed from God’s sight.  Also one of the most damning statements God makes.

2 Kings 24: 3 Surely at the commandment of the Lord this came upon Judah, to remove them from His sight because of the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he had done, 4 and also because of the innocent blood that he had shed; for he had filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, which the Lord would not pardon.

Again, removed from His sight. 

Quo Vadis MAGA?

Which way are you going, MAGA? 

Trump is the most confusing president in my lifetime (just see my last post, and compare it to several of my earlier posts).  Some people see him playing 4-D chess or call it his negotiation strategy, others just see it for chaos.  He regularly says things the opposite of each other and regularly does things at least seemingly the opposite of each other or opposite of something he just said three minutes before.  I won’t rehash these here, I think the evidence is clear enough.

I have been thinking through how I might best understand what is going on.  At times like this, I think it is best to go back to some fundamentals; call these the lenses through which I see the political world.

There are two fundamental lenses through which I see the geopolitical landscape.  Now, I often forget these, and when this happens, I find myself swaying because of allowing myself to be unrooted.  Having said this, I am not completely married to these two lenses – these may not play at all.  However, until I see actions clearly in contradiction to the lenses…well, the lenses stand for me.

So, what are these lenses?

The Geographical Pivot of History

Also known as the Heartland Theory.  Halford Mackinder gave a talk in 1904 to the Royal Geographic Society in London.  A picture is worth a thousand words, so let’s start with a picture.

 

 

To summarize his thesis: whoever controls the Pivot Area controls the world.  Britain at that time, and the United States certainly since World War Two, have controlled the seas – the Lands of the Outer Crescent.  But this will be irrelevant to whoever brings under control and tames the Pivot Area.

I ask you, therefore, for a moment to look upon Europe and European history as subordinate to Asia and Asiatic history, for European civilization is, in a very real sense, the outcome of the secular struggle against Asiatic invasion.

For a thousand years, Europe dealt with hoards coming from Central Asia – the Pivot Area, or Heartland. 

To the east, south, and west of this heart-land are marginal regions, ranged in a vast crescent, accessible to shipmen. 

The margins, or Inner Crescent, are key.  A buffer for the Pivot Area and a source of chaos for the Outer Crescent to use against the Pivot Area.  And, guess what?

 

 

Mackinder identifies the key players of his time.  Little has changed:

Outside the pivot area, in a great inner crescent, are Germany, Austria, Turkey, India, and China, and in an outer crescent, Britain, South Africa, Australia, the United States, Canada, and Japan.

I would only comment that western China is certainly in the Pivot Area, making China a key Pivot Area player.  Otherwise, take a look at the list: the Outer Area was at the time all allies of Britain (with South Africa more recently becoming iffy).  Those in the Great Inner Crescent are seen as where the game is to be played.