Why Public Virtue Must Be Destroyed Before Society Can ‘Evolve’
I wonder how many Americans are familiar with this passage from the Gospel of Luke:
New International Version (NIV)
34 “Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? 35 It is fit neither for the soil nor for the manure pile; it is thrown out.
“Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear.”
I wonder how many of those Americans who are familiar with this passage understand it, what it means for society? Now, I will not claim I understand it entirely. I won’t claim to understand much of anything in the Bible “entirely.” But I know this: our founders understood this passage to mean – at least in part – that a good person who goes bad is not of much use to society because, once we go bad, we can no longer do good. This is what it means when we say a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. And it is what these two men were trying to tell us:
“Character is much easier kept than recovered.”
— Thomas Paine
“America is great because America is good. If America ever ceases to be good it will cease to be great.”
— Alexis de Tocqueville (attributed)
There is something else our founders understood that is inherent in the principle this passage of Scripture is trying to teach us. If a nation loses its virtue, if it is made mostly of selfish and corrupt people, that nation will not remain free:
“A general dissolution of the principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy…. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue, they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader…. If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved. This will be their great security.”
— Samuel Adams
“Bad men cannot make good citizens. It is impossible that a nation of infidels or idolaters should be a nation of freemen. It is when a people forget God that tyrants forge their chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom. No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue; and by a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.”
— Patrick Henry
Now, let me share something with you that may be difficult to accept. There are people in this country who are not only aware of the principle Christ was trying to warn us against in the Gospel of Luke, the same principles our founders used to build a great nation, they have actually studied it to see how it can help them change our society. We must remember: to these people, society is nothing more than a piece of clay that can be molded by their actions. They see the process of molding society as a science. This is why they need to destroy this nation’s virtue; because their ‘science’ tells them that a nation of virtuous people will oppose their plans to re-make society. So, to them, Christ’s warning is actually a blue print for the first step in their plan to socially engineer the society of their dreams. They must first destroy the moral foundation of our society before our society can ‘evolve.’ Only then can they hope to shape us into the society they desire.
Not so coincidentally, this is the motto of the Fabian Socialist Society, and it can be seen in this picture. Notice how they are heating the world (causing social unrest) and beating it with a hammer (another symbol of manufactured unrest). This is so they can more easily shape the world into what they want it to be, which is exactly what is written across the top of the stained glass window (also, notice the wolf in sheep’s clothing above the heated globe. This symbolizes that they are aware their plans need to be done in secret, by deception):
If you will research many of the most powerful people in the world, the people who work behind the scenes, you will find many of them have direct connections to the Fabians. George Soros is an excellent example., He was actually trained at the Fabian School of Economics. If you then add the many different branches of political ideology which the Fabians spawned, such as the American Progressive movement, you will find that many more powerful people have indirect connections to the Fabians. But it doesn’t really matter because their goals are basically the same, they just differ on how best to achieve them.
But it is not enough to simply show the connections between people and an ideology, or to explain that these people want to destroy society’s virtue so they can reshape it. If we are to accept that they are actually doing so, we must first present some sort of evidence that there actually is a decline in social virtue. Then we have to show that it is connected to some positive or affirmative action by these same people that have affected this decline. This is a much more difficult task, but I would suggest that this is exactly what the following stories represent: a decline in the moral fiber of our society:
These stories are just a few of the examples I could have used, and all of them came in the last seven days preceding the writing of this post. So, what d we have here? We have the promotion of promiscuity among teens (note: I did not post a story about the Miley Sirus twerking incident on national TV). We have people telling parents they should kill their child because he annoys them. We have people calling 911 because their cable went out. We have a ‘journalist’ stripping during an interview with a town mayor. We have people threatening to kill a man because they don’t like the political joke he made. And we have the police telling people they cannot feed the homeless. I ask you: where is the morality in any of this? It was not too long ago where any of these stories would have been seen as a sign of despicable immorality and disrespect to our fellow man, but no longer. Today, our government and media treat stories such as these with indifference – if they even tell these stories at all. But this still does not prove causality. That will require another post.