Home » Posts tagged 'democracy'

Tag Archives: democracy

The United States and the War in Ukraine (Part One)

A Similar Series I Wrote in 2023

Like the rest of the world, I hope for the gospel to spread to and in both Russia and the Ukraine.  Jesus will some day reign over the whole earth and bring true peace.  In the meantime, nations must operate together in a sin-cursed world and James 4:1-2 regularly comes true:

From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?  Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.

War is the reality of this age, yet something nations should attempt to avoid, not at all costs though.  What about the war between Russia and Ukraine?  Some call it a proxy war between Russia and the United States. Europe, right on the doorstep of Ukraine, does not pay for the war despite its close proximity.  Neither does it send any of its own men to die with the Ukrainians in their fight against Russia.

It’s easy to sympathize with evangelical believers in Ukraine.  Men spread the gospel, make disciples, train leaders, and churches start in that country.  Many, I’m sure, are sadly dying in this war.  Whatever good thoughts and genuine prayers for the believers of Ukraine, this is not the basis for making a decision on what’s right for the United States to do in this situation.  Thousands of Christians inhabited the Roman Empire when it fell.

Before I launch into my opinion on the conflict, I will sketch out some history for us to consider.

History

Pre World War 2

Historians agree that Russia started by at least the 10th century.  Kyiv, now Ukraine, was a vital part of the earliest iteration of Russia between 882 and 1240, when the Mongols invaded. Ivan the Terrible later became the first Tsar of Russia in 1547.  Peter the Great declared the Russian Empire in 1721 at which time Kyiv became a part.  Kyiv remained in Russia until the collapse of the Russian Empire in 1917 during World War I (see map of Europe in 1910).  Ukraine briefly became independent, embracing Communism.

Ukraine was a founding republic of the Soviet Union as the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic in 1922. Its borders were adjusted several times during the Soviet period based on administrative decisions made in Moscow.  Following World War 2, various international treaties changed Ukraine’s borders further (with little to no world protest) as it gained territories such as Western Ukraine from Poland and parts from Romania and Czechoslovakia due to shifting post-war boundaries.

Post World War 2

U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt had earlier granted the Soviet Union diplomatic recognition in 1933.  Later at the Yalta Conference in February 1945 toward the end of World War 2, he, Churchill, and Stalin discussed post-war arrangements for Europe. They drew lines of occupation controlled by each Allied power. This agreement inherently acknowledged that much of Eastern Europe would fall under Soviet influence, and then it did.

Roosevelt wanted to maintain a cooperative relationship with Stalin to ensure Soviet participation in the war against Japan and then post-war peace efforts.  This is a reason he opted for the Soviets to capture Berlin first, thinking that would strengthen the U.S. position in negotiations over post-war Europe.  FDR, a Democrat, the socialist leaning, liberal political party of the United States jettisoned regions like Ukraine to Stalin.

Post Cold War and NATO Expansion

Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, NATO expanded several times to include former Eastern Bloc countries and Baltic states, which Russia perceived and still perceives as a breach of trust based on early assurances from the United States that this would not occur.  At a handshake level, American diplomats, such as James Baker, assured Russia against NATO expansion past Eastern Germany.  Russia believes the West violated an implicit agreement that NATO would not expand into Eastern Europe to which Putin often refers as justification for his actions.

Many compare the threat of NATO expansion to the Russia border and Ukraine to the Soviets placing nuclear missiles in Cuba.  The United States would not allow it.

Motivation

A common refrain in discussions of Russia and Ukraine is an expression of democracy.  The United States must support democracy across the world.  One could call this a doctrine of foreign policy.  The present administration at least questions this doctrine and its consistency in Europe.  Europe claims democracy, but it looks like “selective democracy,” which isn’t democracy at all.  J.D. Vance in a speech in Munich brought out the selectiveness of European freedom, especially targeting religious freedom and freedom of speech.  I haven’t heard really any answer on this from Europe.

Thousands are dying in Ukraine and will keep dying.  Ukraine will not win the war.  I’m not saying Russia did well in this war, but they committed to it, have more people, and enough money to keep making weapons.  Could Ukraine win?  No.  Not just Europe, but the U. S. military would need to join in the fight.  Europe does not show a true commitment to Ukraine.  It pretends commitment with no endgame.  At most Ukraine could inflict more damage on Russia, a very risky proposition, because Russia has nuclear weapons and a growing incentive to use them.

European Support

After the Zelensky live-televised oval office meeting with the President and others, Zelensky travelled to Europe to receive immediate support from European leaders.  What does this mean?  Europe has no serious proposal.  It barely supported Ukraine.  It dedicates an infinitesimal percentage of its budget to its own defense.  Europe didn’t send troops to fight with Ukraine.  Nations like the United Kingdom don’t protect their own borders, let alone Ukraine.  They have emaciated, weak militaries that alone might serve as a speed bump for Russia.

From my perspective, by supporting Zelensky in public, albeit pretend support, Europe disrespected the present government of the United States, which represents the American people according to a democratic vote.  Europe wants American support without giving America respect.  European leaders like Starmer and Macron, and then the Canadian Trudeau, undermine a possible peace between Russia and Ukraine to stop this war.  They do this without any realistic alternative.

I don’t know of one poll that asks whether the citizens of these European countries want to send troops to join Ukraine to die in its fight against Russia.  Why isn’t that question being asked?  It’s obvious.  Everyone knows that not one nation wants a part of that.  The support for Ukraine is a pretend support, essentially a lie.  European support for Ukraine means less than nothing.  The left and neo-cons in the United States and its media join them in this mass deception.

More to Come

Democrats Most Astonishing Hate of Democracy

The Symbol of the Reichstag in Germany

A pivotal moment in Hitler’s rise in Germany came from the Nazi burning of the Reichstag.  They started the fire, put it out, and then blamed it on the Communists.  Democrats in the United States steal this act in a campaign to destroy democracy.  The Nazis convinced a large portion of the German population that the Communists burned down their Parliament building.  Even their courts wouldn’t disagree.

The Democrats, which have the related word “democracy” imbedded in their name, similarly point the finger at Trump as an authoritarian or totalitarian.  His policies looked and still look exponentially more democratic than the finger pointers.  He would like the government out of most of the business of Americans.  Evidence abounds for this, but let me first take a small step back.

Democracy

The United States isn’t a democracy.  James Madison in Numbers 10 and 14 of the Federalist Papers makes this point quite well.  But let’s set that aside for now.

For the sake of argument, let’s say that a Constitutional Republic is a form of democracy.  A website called “Principles of Democracy” writes:

Freedom of speech and expression, especially about political and other public issues, is the lifeblood of any democracy. Democratic governments do not control the content of most written and verbal speech. Thus democracies are usually filled with many voices expressing different or even contrary ideas and opinions.

Citizens and their elected representatives recognize that democracy depends upon the widest possible access to uncensored ideas, data, and opinions. For a free people to govern themselves, they must be free to express themselves — openly, publicly, and repeatedly; in speech and in writing.

Freedom of Speech and Democracy

Wikipedia for “Freedom of Speech” reads:

Freedom of speech is understood to be fundamental in a democracy.

Democrats censor their opposition more than anyone and with unending examples.  They are similar to the presence of Islam in any country.  While Moslems are in a small minority, they cry for human rights, but the moment they take charge with less than a majority, they eliminate unfavorable voices.

Oligarchy followed democracy in Greece.  Democrats control a vast majority of the public square in America.  I include in that schools, media, and even government.  They gladly censor opposing viewpoints.  The Democrat controlled institutions don’t allow the truth of the Bible.  Unless Christians privately fund their own museum, you won’t see a creation account in public.  Democrats label many biblical truths, “hate speech.”

Censorship

Democrats use both hard and soft censorship.  By hard censorship, I mean official and legal disallowance of a place and opportunity to speak.  It may be the loss of a job, because the Democrats don’t hear a statement of support for same sex activity.  That turns the non-speaker, who would like to say something against the activity but doesn’t, into enemy status.

By soft censorship, I mean an avalanche of public repudiation and ridicule until speakers do not receive opportunities to speak.  It’s also moderating who speaks.  The establishment offers a phony, a fraud, as the representative of the alternative point of view, who goes along with the official or permitted position.  Very little to nothing comes in a way of supporting the alternative position.

A historic label for soft censorship is the “kangaroo court.”  The J6 Committee is a good example of this, but they abound in every state in either blue states, districts, or regions.  They also exist in red areas with blue strongholds.  The committee cherry picks their own rubber stamps to represent opposition.  Opposition is actually major support with a fake label of opposition.  I would hope everyone knows this, but I’m afraid it fools just enough of the disengaged.

Other Examples

The J6 Committee parallels with the internet.  You read about the “algorhythms.”  The oligarchs of the tech industry force opposition or non-supportive speech into an uninhabited hinterland.  They are whole national forests of trees that fall and no one hears, so they don’t make a noise.  Only approved speech moves into a hearing zone.  Yes, people published something, but no one is reading, because no one is seeing.

The Hunter Biden laptop is a good example too.  I say these are just examples of what is now normal.  Any supportive tweet or internet entry of the laptop goes unseen, censored as disinformation.  The censorship itself is the disinformation, much like the Russian collusion operation.  I think this is the least of it though.  It’s a censorship industry.

The industry removes the bad news about the favored issue or person.  Right now, it has the ability to project a pro-Hamas experience, despite a relatively powerful coalition for Israel.  Pro-Palestinian protestors crowd the White House and knock down a protective fence with little coverage from the media.  The industry does not parallel or hearken to anything insurrectionist.

Massive Scale Elimination of Democratic Values

As I write on this subject, the most massive scale about which I speak is in education, where for years, the Bible, God, righteousness, and creation and the like are kept out of the massive state school complex even in red states.  No one can take a male headship position in anything close to a public square.  Can you imagine a professor at a major university who takes open biblical views?  It doesn’t happen except in private.  You must pay to hear the truth told.

I would agree that the Bill of Rights and especially the first amendment is the essence of democratic values.  When do you read anything from the left defending free speech anymore?  Democrats don’t write about their love for the first amendment. The closest is a totalitarian support of smut for small children in public schools and genderless bathrooms.  These are not about the protection of speech or opportunity to have a voice.

Pent-Up Voices

The J6 crowd came to a rally and then walked to the capital out of a long pent-up frustration of censorship.  Yes, better means of expression exist.  The high percentage of silencing from the left came to a logger head.  That group that day did wrong things.  This is not what-aboutism.  I see that day as the equivalent of throwing snow balls at the Old State House in Boston in 1770.  The censorship industry, I’m afraid, because of its reaction, has not seen the worst.

We could hope that people care enough to do something about the actual attack on democracy from the Democrat Party.  So far, I see it as a peaceful embrace of those who would allow free speech.  It seems most represented by an ability to oppose masks and vaccinations.  Still, do positions exist for scientists with an opposing view?  Are there safe places of employment in hospitals and in medical schools with an alternate view?  I’m saying this is just representative, because the worst relates to far more important issues of truth.

Democrats have a burning Reichstag type hatred of democracy.  The Nazis opposed burning the Reichstag.  But they burned it.  The Democrats don’t mind burning everything down to get their way.  They don’t care if you vote or not.  They don’t even want you able to say what they don’t want to hear.

Ballot Harvesting, the Big Lie, and the 2020 Election

Just to be clear to you reading, I don’t think President Joe Biden won the 2020 election.   Even if I can’t show you the evidence yet, it’s still what I think.  Most who join me in thinking the same thing don’t have access to what they would need to prove it.  Others are already proving it.  I hope they do.

I did not take the tack of blaming computerized voting systems, the Dominion voting machines.  It sounded very fishy and I still think people might prove people rigged that too.  However, I pointed to the ballot harvesting made easier with the use of the Pandemic, the strategy of not letting a good crisis go to waste.

President Biden received 81 million votes, but I don’t think he got them legally.  Like many others, I say “no way” he got that many votes.  He did the least I’ve ever seen to win an election.  William McKinley had his “front porch campaign.”  Joe Biden had his basement camera campaign.  Trump filled arenas and Biden very often couldn’t fill classrooms.  How did President Biden get enough votes?  Ballot harvesting.

So much corruption went into a Biden win in 2020.  The media concealed and censored the Hunter Biden laptop story.  The media and big parts of the government helped and promoted the Russian collusion hoax.  Tech giants like Zuckerberg helped Biden in likely illegal ways. The Trump impeachment was a fraud.  The media shielded the country from Biden family crimes.  Without all of those, even with ballot harvesting, maybe Trump wins.  On the other hand, with all of those and also without ballot harvesting, probably Trump wins.

I’m not saying President Trump ran the perfect campaign, but those who blame the election loss on Trump, this including recently Attorney General William Barr, I think they’re very wrong.  The things that Barr and others like him say lost Trump the election are also what won Trump the election.  You can’t separate the two.  People come out for Trump because they like what others say lose Trump an election.

In the background of Elon Musk buying Twitter is Trump ousted from Twitter.  The bigness of the conversation about Musk and free speech connects to Trump canning by social media.  This doesn’t even start with the search algorithms that send people to biased locations, helping promote the choices of the tech titans.

To remind you, ballot harvesting occurs when operatives essentially vote for massive numbers of people who would not vote otherwise.  They fill out the ballots for people who would not vote.  Many more votes could come from nursing homes and other large institutions.  This also explains the opposition to voter identification by those who want ballot harvesting.  They call this Democracy.  If you do not like the corruption, you oppose democracy or better, you’re a threat to democracy.

Part of hiding the crime and corruption came and comes by calling the investigation of or even accusation of crime and corruption, the Big Lie.  Those who say people stole the election are co-conspirators of the Big Lie.  If someone says the other side stole the election, they join the Big Lie.  The allegation of the Big Lie is a Big Lie.  The Big Lie isn’t a lie.  The lie is the claim of a Big Lie.  It is just another lie among many.

Even if entering the capital on January 6, 2020 was the wrong move, the treatment or coverage of January 6 is part of the cover-up of a stolen election.  Many reading here probably know the possibly true story that government operatives joined and helped lead the crowd into the capitol that day.  Whatever happened, they helped push it into something they could use to conceal all the real corruption.

You may have heard the terminology, “useful idiot.”  It is technical for being used, really manipulated, by the wrong side in propaganda necessary to promote the wrong cause and ideas.  If you cooperate with those accusing the Big Lie, you’re useful to them.  You help them silence those uncovering the truth.

Like me, you might be thinking there’s no way Joe Biden got 81 million votes in the 2020 election.  Maybe he got those votes.  It’s just that someone else filled out the ballots than those whose name was on them.

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives