The Enlightenment: Anglo-American (Genesis) vs Franco-Germanic (Anti-Genesis)
“9th Circuit Endorses Censoring Christians,†ruling declares ‘family values,’ ‘natural family,’ and ‘marriage’ constitutes hate speech. (WorldNetDaily, 3/8/07)
Â
“Walter Cronkite Endorses Campaign to Force Christianity Out of US Public Life,†LifeSiteNews, 2/28/07, Gudrun Schultz)Â
These are but two examples out of thousands that expose the Left’s brazenly relentless assault against
America’s founding Christian-Judeo worldview and traditional culture. All too many Americans allow these attacks to occur because on one hand, they’ve been dumbed-down and deceived by the Leftist controlled education establishment and media, while on the other hand, they’ve been taken in by a myth.
Â
The myth assures Americans that there was but one Enlightenment school of thought, that it is synonymous with American ideals and progress, and that religion—particularly Christianity—must be kept strictly separate from the state. Not only is all of this untrue, but these notions are invidious alien transplants to our shores.Â
Â
 In fact, a schism occurred among Enlightenment thinkers from which emerged two distinct and antithetical schools of thought.  For ease of identification, Balint Vazsonyi refers to them in his book, “
America’s 30 Years War†as the Anglo-American and the Franco-Germanic.
Â
Genesis: Anglo-American Â
Among Anglo-American thinkers were for instance, Edmund Burke, Adam Smith, Lord Acton, John Jay, and James Madison. To these thinkers, the indisputable foundations of society are man’s Creator, sanctity of life, enduring morality and virtue, family, religion, individuality, property, custom, law, community, order, freedom, prosperity, and recognition of man’s fallen nature.
Â
Of our Founders, M. Stanton Evans reports there were forty Christians and one Deist. Of those who attended the Virginia Constitutional Convention in 1776, Evans states that only three were not vestrymen. (The Theme is Religion, p. 272)Â
John Adams testified to
America’s Christian roots when he wrote, “The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were…the general principles of Christianity…those…principles…are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature.†(Works, Vol. X, pp. 45-46, to Thomas Jefferson, June 28, 1813)
Â
           “So God created man in his own image…male and female (He) created them†Gen.1:27 (and thus man is endowed with soul, spirit, conscience, individuality, and free will)Â
Â
Â
From the Bible’s Genesis account come the all important and immutable first principles of life and liberty expressed in the Declaration of Independence thusly,
“that all people are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.†  The word ‘inalienable’ means ‘not from man.â€Â Â
Â
Alexander Solzhenitsyn demonstrated his understanding of the Ultimate Source of these first principles when he stated, “In American democracy at the time of its birth, all individual human rights were granted because man is God’s creature. That is, freedom was given to the individual conditionally, on the assumption of his religious responsibility.â€Â (A World
Split Apart)
Â
The Bible teaches that man is ‘fallen’ (has a sin nature), thus the Founders understood that man is corruptible, and with power a primary source of corruption, they ingeniously structured three branches of government into which they distributed power equally. Government being seen as a necessary evil in order to secure the rights and liberties of the people, it was strictly limited in scope and size and tightly bound by the Constitution—the supreme law of the land. Man, the primary source of evil, was to be constrained by the moral disciplines of the Great Lawmaker’s universal moral laws, The Laws of Nature and Nature’s God, known in
America as the Ten Commandments. Moral constraints, believed our Founders, lead to a moral citizenry, which in turn leads to a moral government. Together, these positive goods create an atmosphere in which justice, order, and maximum freedom can flourish with a minimum of government.
Â
Less than a century after Jefferson’s death, James Bryce, an English visitor to the
US said, “Christianity is in fact…though not the legally established religion, (is) yet the national religion. So far from thinking their commonwealth godless, the Americans conceive that the religious character of a government consists in…the religious belief of the individual citizens and the conformity of their conduct to that belief.†(God’s Funeral, A.N. Wilson, p. xii)
Â
America’s
Constitutional
Republic—a glorious accomplishment of Anglo-American thought—is something unique in the history of the world. In
America, “We the people,†empowered by the one God, tell the government what it is allowed to do. For the first time ever, a system of government was built “of the people, by the people, and for the people.â€
Â
Anti-Genesis: Franco-Germanic Â
In stark contrast to the magnificent accomplishment of Anglo-American thought stand the blight of socialism and its highly developed evil sibling, the malevolent system of Marxism.  These spiritual sicknesses are the ‘greatest’ achievements of the Franco-Germanic side.
Â
“The world has never before known a godlessness as organized, militarized, and tenaciously malevolent (evil) as that preached by Marxism. Within the philosophical system of Marx and Lenin and at the heart of their psychology, hatred of God is the principal driving force.â€Â (Alexander Solzhenitsyn quoted in “Defending the Natural Family Against the Gay Juggernaut, John A. Howard, Ph.d; The Howard Center, 3/8/06)
Â
A major philosophical architect of the evil siblings is the amoral Prophet Jean Jacques Rousseau, a narcissist who callously used people to fulfill his self-centered needs and desires. Rousseau was described by Daniel J. Flynn as a person who was, “incapable of holding a job and sponged off women his entire life. He spawned five children, not one of whom he bothered to name, all of whom he abandoned to almost certain death at an asylum.â€Â Jean Jacques, continued Flynn, “was a sexual pervert who enjoyed physical punishment and exposing himself to women.â€Â It should come as no surprise, observed Flynn that Rousseau advocated, “a philosophy of sexual anarchy, state ownership of children, and the subsidization of those unwilling to work.†(Intellectual Morons, p. 33)
Â
The axis on which Rousseau’s philosophy turns is the proposition that man is born good. In other words, and contrary to what our Founders believed and Christianity teaches, man’s nature contains no dark side, or sin nature. The primary source of evil and suffering is not man spouted Rousseau, but religion—especially Christianity— plus the concept of sin and the very pillars of society deemed ‘indispensable’ by Anglo-American thinkers.
Â
Creating the New Man and Utopian SocietyÂ
“Whoever ventures to undertake the founding of a nation should feel himself capable of changing human nature…of transforming each individual.â€Â Rousseau, the ‘sinless demi-god’, quoted in Frederic Bastiat’s ‘Selected Essays on Political Economy, p.97
Â
“We are at a stage in history in which remolding society is one of the great challenges facing…us in the West.†Hillary Clinton aping Rousseau, quoted in “I’ve Always been a Yankee Fan, Thomas D. Kupier, p.119Â
Â
Rousseau’s prescription for the salvation and redemption of mankind called for the severing of all social and familial ties and the wholesale destruction of society. “Each citizen,†he stated, “would (then) be …absolutely dependant on the State.â€Â The State—controlled by the intellectually-superior Anointed—would serve as “the agency of emancipation that permits the individual to develop the latent germs of goodness heretofore frustrated by a hostile society.† Emancipation achieved, the “always constant, unalterable, and pure†State would then subsume individual wills into a “General Will†(‘Common Good’ in today’s leftist-speak) thereby creating not only a New Man but an Ideal Society.  Moreover, posited Rousseau, since human nature is undefined (socially constructed, in Leftist-speak), not only is it infinitely moldable (it can even have 5-14 gender variants, claim intellectual morons), but there are no moral principles and Creator to limit the social-engineering ambitions of the godlike State. Should any citizens refuse to be socially re-engineered and subsumed into Divine Oneness that merely proves that they have been corrupted and therefore must be forced into conformity. True liberty, bleated Rousseau, lies in conforming to General Will and dissidents must be, “forced to be free.â€Â
“We’re going to…take things away from you on behalf of the common good.†Hillary again aping Rousseau at fund-raiser, SFGate.com, 6/28/04Â
Â
The Reign of Terror that overtook the French Revolution of 1793 was the first attempt by the Anointed to devise a New Order and a New Man. Robespierre and his Jacobin’s heeded Rousseau’s call for ‘force’ and condemned and executed all who opposed them. Over 17,000 people were executed within the year.
Â
Among the many and ever-evolving destructive doctrines, schemes, and programs spawned thus far by Franco-Germanic notions are nihilism, permanent revolution, atheism, radical feminism, secular humanism, New Humanist Man, New International Child of the future, positive law or sociological jurisprudence, collectivism, progressivism, statism, socialism, utopianism, New World Order, libertinism, queer theory, abortion, infanticide, eugenics, euthanasia, moral relativism, it takes a village, re-education camps, gulags, gas chambers, and killing fields.
Â
Later, Karl Marx and Fredrich Engel’s wed Franco-Germanic ideas to communism, Freudian psychology, and
Darwin’s theory of evolution (serving as a counterfeit genesis account) to produce the atheistic religion of Marxism. In turn, Marxism spawned nihilism, bolshevism, New Soviet Man, fascism, New Aryan Man, social Darwinism, class consciousness, social justice, identity politics, hate crime laws, speech codes, political correctness, the New Left, Cultural Marxism (multiculturalism), and modern liberalism (socialism in disguise).  And where under Rousseau’s system man was deprived of individuality and free will and then reduced to an anonymous cog in the machinery of the General Will, he was now reduced to something less than human. Stripped of individuality, free will, soul, spirit, and conscience, he became a slightly smarter ape to whom, although he hasn’t yet realized it, the Constitution of the
United States no longer applies.
Â
“I’m going to start thinking of her as a human being.â€Â Social Darwinist Hillary, referring to the woman who cleans the restroom she (Hillary) uses. (Peggy Noonan, discoverthenetworks.org)
Â
Manmade Hell’s and Rivers of BloodÂ
Historian R.J. Rummel graphically describes the hellish consequences when unbridled Power is in the hands of fallen man: “During the first eighty-eight years of this century (20th) almost 170 million men, women, and children have been shot, beaten, tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed or worked to death; buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed, or killed in any other of the myriad ways governments have inflicted death on unarmed, helpless citizens and foreigners. The dead could conceivably be nearly 360 million people. It is as though our species has been devastated by a modern Black Plague. And indeed it has, but a plague of Power, not germs.†(Death by Government, p.9)
Â
These millions died, not because of our Founders Christian-Judeo worldview, but because of the ideas generated by egocentric Franco-Germanic thinkers such as Hegel, Comte, Rousseau, Spencer, Babeuf, Darwin, Freud, Marx, and Engel’s. Ideas then acted on by great wicked ones such as Trotsky, Lenin, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot.  The same ideas—of sexual anarchy, moral relativism, wrath, malevolence, violence, furious hatred, and nihilism—that have corrupted some on the Right and in the GOP and which are the dark-forces that drive the Left as it avidly anticipates seizing Absolute Control and Power over America and Americans.Â
Â
Alexander Solzhenitsyn warns us that, “Militant atheism is not merely incidental or marginal to communist policy; it is…the central pivot. To achieve its diabolical ends, communism needs to control a population devoid of religious and national feeling, and this entails a destruction of faith and nationhood.†(ibid)
Â
The antidote should be obvious. It is rededication to and revival of all that made America great in the first place, “ the indisputable foundations of society are man’s Creator, sanctity of life, family, religion ,individuality, enduring morality and virtue, property, custom, law, community, order, freedom, prosperity, and recognition of man’s fallen nature.â€
Â
Â
Â
 Copyright Linda Kimball 2007
http://patriotsandliberty.com/
Â
Additional Resources:
How Now Shall We Live? Colson, Pearcy
Marxism and American Society, David A. Noebel
The Worldviews of Destruction in the 20th Century, David A. Noebel
Cheers to Truth! A Collection of Hillary Compiled by discoverthenetworks.org, 2/21/07
Â
About Linda: Linda is the author of numerous articles and essays on culture, politics, and worldview which are published both nationally and internationally.
Â
Â
 Â
  Â
Â
Â
Â
Possibly related posts...
| More from Linda Kimball
Stumble It!
Phew. Time to strap the leather chapps on, Chaps. Saddle-up Ray! Harness the Anger. Clear the decks of mendacity. Don’t shoot your feet though.
The members of an Army do not all agree on all things. Even SAS guys have their favourite weapons and reasonably free choice of what to use. But, at the very least, they don’t shoot one another. And some members of the rag-tag army aren’t male or in jail. Boucher didn’t even share a language with Wellington but they made themselves understood and allies for a while when it mattered. So too must men and women.
Linda’s analysis is far better than that of the Stephonies of the world even if the only lip service she gives the English to ideas genesis is in the Anglo part of her anglo-american. Back when, the early ‘americans’ were the riff-raff English that Ray describes as now languishing in jail or under arches. It is hardly surprising that the ideas of the ‘Anglosphere’ are opposed by the continental europeans. ‘Twas ever thus. The Americans have only had the problem for 250 years. The English have had it for near on a thousand. History is no more a blank slate than a sociologists model of a human being.
While the temptation is always there to deride different tactical choices – and those who profess them – Derrida will take advantage and we will lose the Truth in all the shouting. The Princess of Lies is winning.
The death of the West, feminism, and the importance of radical men’s rights activists in possibly saving, and being the last hope of, a dying culture are nicely tied together in this column from by Ray Remark:
14/4/02
The Boys in the Back Room
Divvying Up the Masculist Kingdom
Ray Remark
It’s easy to tell when the wings of a nascent social movement catch first air: the wannabes, agenda-hawkers, and assorted political lightweights huddle with their sycophants, plotting out the Revolution – where it’s going, who gets to be rule, and how their own power can be consolidated and maximized.
Oh! Brotherhood! false and fallen as ever, dead to thy own heartbeat: mired in contrivance self-made.
Ten thousand kings sally forth and alas! – only one Kingdom.
The men’s movement, emaciated infant that it is, currently is experiencing its initial trickle of “voice†into the American Machine.
That is, male viewpoint has graduated from total censorship under matriarchy to merely overwhelming censorship.
Wendy McElroy, who describes herself as an “independent feminist,†is now empowered by our feminist “patriarchy†to address the masses on behalf of males.
Close on her (high) heels is Mr. Glenn Sacks, whose writings on men have also found favor before the System.
Activists who have worked for decades in the catacombs of the gyneocracy were amused last week at the Men’s Activism News Network’s lead article, “Confronting Women-Bashing in the Men’s Movement,†authored by Mr. Sacks — that ubiquitous and prolific spokesman for American masculinity.
The article, posted by the equally omnipresent James Hanback, Jr. (“Nightmistâ€), attacked the National Coalition of Free Men, and pummeled the “radicals†in the movement for their alleged misogyny. In great detail, Mr. Sacks’ savaged these evil “woman bashers,†drawing up a “profile†containing ten “characteristics†known to be possessed by the women-haters. (In later correspondence, Mr. Sacks admitted that his original “profiling list†was significantly longer – containing even more misogynistic sins and sinners – but he reluctantly whittled it down for economy’s sake. And they say god is dead.)
No doubt the National Organization for Women, the academy, the media, and the “justice system†were greatly cheered by and indebted to Sacks, Hanback, and MANN, for their assistance in broadening and legitimizing the criminalization of maleness in America.
The marginalizing and silencing of dissident males is now the “mainstream†of the men’s movement.
We’ve come a long way, baby!
The evening that Mr. Sacks’ hit-piece was published, I saw Andrea Dworkin and Gloria Steinem capering down Fifth Avenue, wearing top-hats. They tapdanced all night on ground zero, in the cold ashes of what we once were.
In my posting on MANN I called Mr. Sacks’ article “political maneuvering.†Mr. Sacks had been feuding with the N.C.F.M. Further, MANN’s political ally, Wendy McElroy, only days before was criticized on soc.men when she turned up promoting her web site. Sacks’ piece was thus a counterstrike, carefully planned for release by an “independent spokesman†of the men’s movement. In reality, the article was a covert defense of both McElroy and her political alliance with MANN – with the usual “women-bashing†scapegoats tossed in for diversion.
Ah, yes, it’s The Boys in the Back Room. And The Girls, too. Scrambling in the dogbowl of politics for those last chunks of kibble.
See, I’m an old dude. Real old. A snarly motherf**k, too. But my memory is peachy. Not only do I remember COINTELPRO, I lived through it. I’ve seen all the tricks and every costume. I know the smell of counterinsurgency like bacon frying on Sunday morning.
In the old days, see, I used to play at politics a tad. Nothing so Byzantine and important as masculist politics, mind you – just dancing with the sharks in the California legislature and judiciary.
They were also pretenders to power, but at least they weren’t newbies.
Back then, in rooms that the public never sees, the gambit by Mr. Sacks and accomplices was called “closing ranks.†Stalin called them “purges.â€
The method never changes. The weak members of an insurgency attempt to “tighten the center†of their powerbase by marginalizing, silencing, and de-legitimizing the strong members. After three decades of the annihilation of masculinity, in a State of complete misandry and matriarchy, Mr. Sacks and his “leaders of men†discover their chief adversary to be “woman-bashers†in the men’s movement.
And they are spot-on. Some of those “extremists†that Mr. Sacks, Mr. Hanback and MANN have “profiled†— that they might languish in cultural prison — have no intention of seeing the men’s movement co-opted. Those “extremists†have watched both the Left and the Right of our culture fall corrupt before the gods of political expediency, money, and privilege. Our faces still drip with the loogies from that grade of “leadership.â€
I pointed out on MANN that the ability of western men to angrily confront both women and the matriarchy was necessary and long overdue, and for Sacks and other male “leadership†to legitimize censorship and the intimidation of other male activists was regressive in the extreme: “. . . for not only do i believe that it is appropriate for men, with just cause, to direct anger at women, i believe that it is currently imperative that strong, outraged men do just that.”
At which consigliare for the Boys in the Back Room – lawyer Marc Angelucci – emerged on the board.
Gee, what a coincidence. He just happened to be at the defense table!
Mr. Angelucci immediately exchanged my permission for males to exhibit anger towards females for my global loathing of anything female: “There’s where we disagree. To me, directing anger at an entire birth group is a form of bigotry.â€
Of course, we did not “disagree.†I had made no reference whatsoever to “directing anger at an entire birth group.â€
I then stated, “i’ve seen my brothers caged, sodomized, stomped and left for dead in the mud, and i have seen the same treatment bestowed on the sons of the nation.”
Mr. Angelucci replied: “And it’s the fault of all women . . . I’ll direct my anger at the system and the misandrists and bigots, male or female, who support it. If you direct your anger at women as a whole, then that’s your choice. I call it bigotry. You don’t. I guess that settles it.â€
Again, I never imputed “fault†to “all women,†nor did I endorse directing “anger at women as a whole.†Indeed, I pointed out carefully that I was as critical of false masculinity in the West as I am of the sick feminine. But it served Mr. Angelucci’s purposes to extend my criticism of Mr. Sacks, Ms. McElroy, and MANN into the character assasination of “bigotry†and misogyny.
Amazing, troops – it’s the EXACT same tactic I’ve encountered in the American classroom, workplace, and home for nigh on four decades. Now our self-appointed “masculist leaders†are using “misogyny†against their own paratroops.
When I had the bigoted ignorance to continue disagreeing with Mr. Angelucci, the following exchange ensued:
Ray: “i have not advocated any injury to women, nor to any woman in particular”
Marc Angelucci: “Nor do certain factions of the Klan advocate injury to blacks. It’s irrelevant.â€
Ray: “no, it’s exactly relevant, otherwise you would not have chosen those words
â€thank you, mr angelucci, for comparing me — in a deniable, backhanded, non-actionable way, to be sure — to the ku klux klan
â€it is very revealing of your methods
“it is likewise revealing that you find need to expand my permission for men to express anger at women, into a generalized hatred of women, thence into the klan
â€this despite my statement to the exact contrary
â€nowhere in my statement did i say anything about “all women†or “an entire birth groupâ€
â€those are YOUR assumptions, because they are indispensable to your argument and purpose, and because without which your position – and the position of certain others here – is indefensible
â€please insert neither words nor sentiments into my statements, mr angelucci, which i have not made
â€that is a despicable and foul tacticâ€
In the midst of the domination of the masculine by the matriarchy and its drones, Mr. Sacks and Mr. Angelucci – and the rest of the Boys – are going to snuggle up to old Machiavelli and attempt to broaden their political appeal by demonizing the very fire that keeps their ovens lit, and their lights on.
Well guess what, Boys? Without those “radicals,†you and your grand political aspirations are going to sh*tland. As in Nowhere with a reek. Without delay.
You think you’re gonna nibble away at the Machine?
Forty years ago I was a naïve bambino, too. “Work within the System†the zombies all assured me. So I did, and it cut my balls off, then laughed at me.
Then it did the same to a hundred million other males.
I thought the Left would regain sanity, I thought the Right would regain sanity, I thought religion and logic and rule of law would come to its senses, stop the madness, and begin the healing.
But they didn’t. And they still don’t. Even worse, they can’t. Instead, the Beast only grows in strength.
Your strategy of grovelling hat-in-hand before our rulers will free the male Scapegoat?
Boys, instead of embracing the Scapegoat, you keep kicking him off the cliff.
The Machine will ingest and eliminate you. Tweedledum and Tweedledee are gonna eat you for breakfast.
Lawyers, web emperors, political hacks, and third-rate “writers†cannot overturn the Hell in which Western masculinity is now imprisoned.
We don’t need any more political brokering, Boys. Thanks alot anyway. We’re already full to the f**king brim with careerists.
Masculinity is broken, and so is the moral and spiritual legitimacy of the West.
We need nothing less than a resurrected manhood, a New Adam, and he will come from our gutters and prisons, from the despised and outcast amongst us. Our cure, and our redemption, waits hidden in the most marginal, unexplored, criminalized, misunderstood elements of masculinity. The broken, the psychotic, the betrayed, the autistic, the demonized, the voiceless – these are the shards from which a new masculinity will be formed. They are brilliant spirits, but they burn very hot.
Instead of accusing, marginalizing, and silencing them, you Boys should shut up and learn. You do not lead the outcasts you have made. They lead you. They have what you lack, and hating them for it does not liberate masculinity. Men and the West are in the mess they are precisely because politics and “religion†are devoid of spirit.
Those misogynists you so lovingly “profile� Guess what? They’re all you’ve really got.
You don’t like that. So you huddle together in consolidation of power that was never yours to begin.
Come on out of the Back Room, Boys. sh*tcan the political alliances, the smear campaigns, the blacklisting, the scapegoating. There’s no Masculist Empire to divvy up. All Empire is on its last legs. This time, it ain’t about Getting Ahead. It ain’t about another Tyrannos, male or female. This time it’s about revelation, brutal truth, astonishment and sacrifice.
Yah, imagine that. Not glory. Not power. Sacrifice.
If you weren’t such children, you’d understand that the very “radicals†you seek to silence are the only thing standing between you and the demons unleashed.
Those “radicals†are the ones keeping your precious Towers upright.
But you Boys just keep at your whuppin’. If you dis and betray them enough, they’ll look the other way again.
And again.
Until you’ve got nothing left but broken bricks.
Of course, y’all are too busy defending the helpless little ladies, writing and promoting articles stomping “woman-bashers,†and affiliating other activists with the ku klux klan.
Busy, busy bees!
Hey, slow train’s a’comin’, Boys! Time to pick a direction.
Don’t ever again let me catch you whipping free on what has already been beaten.
Next time I might let them up off the ground. Then you’d have a fair fight, and a Real Problem.
Yo, princelings: get used to dealing with what you hate.
The harder you play at Alpha, the further you fall in the pack.
Them’s the new rules, Boys, made by men on fire, sweating in the halls of inclusion and justice. Keep shoving them back into hell and you will get burned.
Beautifully written Linda.
“The same ideas—of sexual anarchy, moral relativism, wrath, malevolence, violence, furious hatred, and nihilism—that have corrupted some on the Right and in the GOP and which are the dark-forces that drive the Left as it avidly anticipates seizing Absolute Control and Power over America and Americans. ”
I’m glad you see that the problem is both the Left and the Right in this country. I agree completely. America is being controlled by an unseen powerful and rich Aristocracy. The government itself is the puppet.
The cancer of Marxisim is deeply embedded already while America sleeps. It will take a rather traumatic national event to awaken the people. Political Correctness keeps the illusion alive. I’m not sure America can survive a Marxist President. In fact I highly doubt that it can. Then again, perhaps that is what it will take to open the eyes of slumbering American’s from the slow, methodical, march we are already on to utopian Marxist Hell. Changes are coming to this country and it’s going to be big.