Paul VanderKlay (PVK) did a video reviewing, among other things, Tucker Carlson’s recent Heritage Foundation talk – the one that some point to as one more reason for his ousting. Following are some of my reactions to this.
PVK asks, what is the answer to the divide seemingly caused by these various cultural and political issues? In my view, the only peaceful answer is secession and decentralization. Secession means gathering with others who share similar cultural, political, and religious views – and excluding those who hold contrary views. Decentralization means governance at ever-lower institutional levels – at the lowest reasonable level (e.g., family).
And this happening, but not in the traditional way. The traditional way would result in The State of Jefferson. But we know that the US government has a history of not allowing peaceful transitions. Not in the United States, not in Korea, not in the former Soviet Union – even Ukraine today. Not anywhere.
But back to how it is happening today. People are migrating – seceding in the way they can. California and New York are losing people, Idaho and Tennessee are gaining people. Unfortunately, this isn’t an answer for everyone, or even many. It can only happen on the margins. But it is happening.
There is no law of God that says three hundred million people have to live under the same rules or in the same culture. When God created the earth, He didn’t draw the political boundaries on His creation. These aren’t carved in stone, so to speak.
We have a culture that freely ignores what God carved in stone, and violently defends that which God did not carve in stone. Abraham Lincoln ignored what was carved in stone by God, and violently defended that which was not carved in stone by God. And he is considered by many as our greatest president – especially so by many Christians…sadly showing how long the road is that must be traveled.
Carlson, when speaking of the culture-destroying actions we see all around us, said something like: The weight of the government is behind it. PVK: “I agree with this, but they aren’t thinking through it either.” I think this is a naïve statement by VanderKlay. He attributes good intentions where such attribution isn’t deserved – or, he doesn’t attribute malevolent intentions when such attribution is richly deserved.
PVK, commenting on one of the many theological points made by Carlson: “He’s not at a theological podium; he’s at a political podium.” VanderKlay would often comment: “Politics is downstream from religion.” He is right. In other words, it’s all theological. It’s just a question of which theology.
PVK: Don’t back your enemies into a corner unless you are planning to do something final. From this, two points: liberal democracy does not have the tools necessary to defend itself; its enemies don’t play by the rules of liberal democracy, and nothing in liberal democracy is available to counteract this. Second, one side in this discussion is happy to just be left alone – in other words, they will tolerate, but don’t demand that they affirm. The other side demands more than toleration; it demands even more than affirmation. It demands subservience.
Then PVK asks: “Was Donald Trump just more pantomime?”