Hear this, if you will

https://www.youtube.com/live/1SJ2mHlduZ0?si=_V99P38NUavesFo-

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Death by plants

Ed McNally, in the New Left Review, has an article appearing within the webpages (to use a paper reference) in which it is stated that “Neta Crawford’s intellectual project (project, notice not a paper) is perhaps best understood as a progressive immanent critique of American empire , defined by intricate attention to the military as an institution – its political history, energy composition, ideologies, procedures, rules, and modes of killing ” Here one sees the very concerns I have been barking about for almost a year now in these blog posts. The concern is that the American “empire,” is used as a word that is intensively proposed as evil and used in the accounting of American advancement.  Remember? I have stated that “nation” and “empire” are crucial in the way the Left vilifies the US.  To beat it all, it is not just the American machinations, but the work of humans which is criticized by the Left should be done by talking plants, where plants do the job, through whom the...
Read more

Mandate of Heaven . . . . (it's all the same)

  天下 Mandate of Heaven This is the mandate, that beautiful notion, the perfection of that which is in the historical. What is the difference between mandate of heaven and manifest destiny or divine providence?   It is that which comes about through no metaphysical being, but rather is the resultant in history.   The Zhou were the first to reference 天下 as that which is meant to be when a ruler won a battle. It was, to put it in a way that we can understand the sense, ordained. There was no personage in heaven or willful nature which ordained the result. This is a very difficult concept to portray in Western ideas or language. Just as the heart of perfect wisdom sutra states, “form is emptiness, emptiness is form,” so too the mandate of heaven is a concept of unusual meaning, for the Westerner.   Bottom line, there may be no equivalent in English, but it seems like that it indicates the winner gets to define history. Sound familiar? It is no wonder that, in a wor...
Read more

FAMILY as the building block

  Stone puts its clearly that a Marxist government starts with groups not individuals, she presents the “building blocks of the polis” as being groups “institutions and organizations” “not individuals”     We know and individuals, families, and God’s church are to be the building blocks of society, not man-made constructs. Groups, institutions, and organizations, are divisive. “they depend on organizations to represent their interests” for Stone the key is to overlook God’s sacraments of the family, marriage, country (i.e. nation), the church, the body of Christ, and God’s children.   From the book of Genesis forward the “nation” was an institution, which postcolonialists deny and believe is a Western Anglo European and Global North concepts that has destroyed indigenous societies (through “civilizations”), but they neglect to see family as an important key in indigenous societies and even among animals.  
Read more