Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Westphalian World Order’

Farage

Nigel Farage and others bid farewell to the EU Parliament, January 29, 2020.

“There’s a historic battle going on now across the West, in Europe, America and elsewhere. It is globalism against populism.  And you may loath populism, but I tell you a funny thing, it’s becoming very popular.”

  • Nigel Farage

 

As of January 31, 2020, Great Britain is no longer part of the European Union (EU).  Britain’s success in parting ways with the EU, what is commonly called Brexit, short for British Exit from the EU, is the culmination of nearly 30 years of work by Britons opposed to the Maastricht Treaty, which the was signed by the U.K.’s conservative government in 1992, making Great Britain part of the EU.

In June 2016, a referendum was held asking voters whether they wanted to remain in the EU or leave.  Despite a great deal of opposition from the establishment, the vote went 52% in favor of Brexit, with 48% electing to remain in the EU.

Although interests dedicated to keeping Britain in the EU worked hard to subvert Brexit, the resounding victory of the conservatives under the leadership of Boris Johnson on December 12, 2019, effectively guaranteed the success of Brexit.

In this post, I don’t intend to get into the weeds of the political process that brought about Brexit.  Neither do I intend to write much about the principle figures who supported Brexit or opposed it.  My aim here is to step back and to view Brexit in its larger historical context, that of conflict between the Protestant Westphalian World Order and the New World Order globalism of the Roman Catholic Church-State (RCCS).

Though very little attention has been paid to the religious aspect of Brexit by mainstream journalism, and though it may seem strange to some to speak of any relationship between the 16th century Protestant Reformation and the 21st century Brexit, this author holds that, not only is there a relationship between the Reformation and Brexit, but that the relationship is a close one.  Indeed, it is not an overstatement to put the relationship in these terms:  No Protestant Reformation, no Brexit.  It’s that simple.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Francis I

Pope Francis

“The national State can’t be considered as an absolute, as an island in regard to the surrounding context.”

  • Pope Francis, May 2, 2019

In spite of the many, clear statements from various popes over the years, the general public still seems to be unaware of the clear and present danger the Vatican poses to the existence of free and independent nation states.

The current occupant of the office of Antichrist, Jorge Bergoglio, dba Francis I, recently expressed his hatred of nation states by attacking “sovereignism” and populism.  According to the Pope, “sovereignism“ is defined as isolationism which he ties to Hitler and those who speak of “Us first. We… we…”

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Juncker.PNG

European Union Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker

There’s an old joke in politics that says a gaff is defined as when a politician accidently tells the truth. That’s not a bad definition. Generally, those in high office are masters at concealing their true beliefs and motives.

But every now and then, the mask slips. Barak Obama famously accused rural Americans of bitterness and of clinging to their guns and religion.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

nicholas maduro

Nicholas Maduro, who at least for today is President of Venezuela.

“…Large protests all across Venezuela today against Maduro. The fight for freedom has begun!”

    – Donald J. Trump

“To end the Maduro regime with the minimum of bloodshed, we need the support of pro-democratic governments, institutions and individuals the world over.”

    – New York Times Editorial, January 30, 2019

Much is made of the current acrimony in American politics. Trump supporters can’t stand Nancy Pelosi, and the SJW’s in the orbit of the Democratic party detest the very mention of Trump’s name.

What is more, the longest government shutdown in American history just ended with a temporary cease fire between the White House and Congressional Democrats over funding for the border wall.

America is a house divided, so we’re told. Quite obviously, the cold American civil war some have written about is ready to explode into a real civil war. Right?

Well, not so fast. It seems there’s more unity, at least among the American establishment, than one would gather from watching the evening news.

Want proof? Just consider the two quotes above, one from a recent Tweet by President Trump, the other from today’s New York Times editorial page.

Some may find the agreement between Trump and the Times surprising. After all, the Donald and the Times have pretty much been locked in a state of verbal warfare ever since the New York billionaire declared his candidacy in the summer of 2015. Trump is the Yin to the Times’ Yang, how is it possible for them to agree on anything?

And yet, they do.

In this case, they both believe in America’s exceptional right to decide who the leader of a foreign country will be.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Ruth_and_Naomi_Leave_Moab

Ruth and Naomi Leave Moab, 1860, by Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld (1794-1872).

Up to this point, most of this series on immigration has been destructive. I have examined immigration stances of various groups – secular and religious liberal, secular and religious conservative, Roman Catholic, globalist – and found them wanting. With this installment, Lord willing, I intend to being building the Reformed, Biblical case for immigration.

The Principle of Free Movement

One error nearly all participants in the immigration debate get wrong is the purpose of borders. As John Robbins pointed out when questioned about immigration, the purpose of borders is to separate rulers, not people, form each other. It’s not the job of governments to tell people where they are to live.

On the immigration restrictionist side we see this misunderstanding represented by the desire to build walls and enact ever tighter immigration laws.

On the open borders side, men who support mass immigration fail to understand that the principle of free movement does not obligate the people of the receiving country to foot the bill for people who wish to come. Immigrants are responsible to pay their own freight. Further, many open borders advocates take the position they do, not because they are interested helping people attain life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but to subvert nations and push a globalist agenda.

The idea of free movement of people can be traced to the Old Testament. For example, when Abraham was called by God to leave Ur of the Chaldees for Canaan, he did not require a passport or any sort of governmental document. He and his family simply up and left. He did not have to negotiate a byzantine bureaucracy to do so.

Likewise when Jacob left to visit Laban. He simply left and went to live with his extended family in another country.

When Jacob was old during the famine, his sons travelled to Egypt to buy grain without any hindrance mentioned in Scripture. Late he and his whole family moved to Egypt.

In the law of Moses, the Israelites were consistently enjoined to welcome the stranger, because they themselves were strangers in Egypt.

On the other hand, restrictions on free movement and deportations were characteristic of big-government imperial powers. For example, the Assyrians deported the population of the Northern Kingdom following the fall of Samaria in 722 BC. In like fashion, Babylon carried off the people of Judah in waves, the last talking place after the conquest of Jerusalem in 586 BC.

According to one source, the earliest known example of a passport was issued by the king of Persia. The account is found in the Book of Nehemiah. In chapter two of that book, Nehemiah requests and is given letters from the king to ensure his safe passage from the Persian capital of Susa to Jerusalem. That these letters served as the equivalent of a modern passport can been see from the words of Nehemiah, who reports that he “gave [the governors in the regions through which he passed] the king’s letters.”

In the New Testament, Acts 18 reports that Paul met a Jewish couple, Aquila and Priscilla, at Corinth. As verse 2 tells us, they were in Corinth, because they had been driven from Rome by a decree of the Emperor Claudius, who had ordered all Jews to leave the city.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

G20 Hamburg_2017

Group photo of the 2017 G20 Summit in Hamburg, Germany. 

To one and all, happy belated Independence Day. Yes, this past week Americans celebrated the fact that, twelve score and one years ago, “our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”

As a kid, July 4th was always one of my favorite times of the year. How could it not be. It was summer. School was out. And it was all about baseball, backyard barbeques with family, and lots of stuff that went boom!

America’s Bicentennial year of 1976 I remember as if it were yesterday. Recently I was reminded how long ago it really was when President Trump made some comment about the upcoming 250th anniversary of America’s independence. Good grief! Where did time go?

Well, even thought a lot of Independence Days have come and gone since 1976, I still love the day for all the same reasons I did back then. An a few more to boot.

You see, when I was a child, I didn’t really grasp the importance of liberty and freedom from tyranny. But as an adult, and one who has been eyewitness to the kind of gross usurpations of liberty governments are capable of, I have come more and more to appreciate the bold stand for liberty of America’s founding generation.

One important facet of the American Revolution that is almost entirely forgotten in the present day is that it represents the political flowering of the Protestant Reformation. Simply put, no Reformation, no United States of America.

In the beginning all America was Protestant – 98 percent of the people. The numbers we have for church affiliation in the seventeenth and eighteenth century America show that three – fourths of Americans were Calvinists of one flavor or another. Puritan, Pilgrim, Presbyterian, Baptist, German Reformed, Lutheran, Congregationalist, and Episcopal. There were few Catholics, almost no Jews or Methodists, and no Muslims, Mormons, Moonies, Buddhists, Confucianists, Hindus, or atheists. Had there been any large numbers of these groups, there would have been no America as we have known it, not because the people who hold these views are somehow inferior, but because the views themselves are inferior: They are logically incapable of creating and sustaining a free society (John Robbins, Rebuilding American Freedom in the Twenty-First Century).

It was biblical political philosophy, not the thought of ancient Greece and Rome, that is the cause of America’s historic, if not present, commitment to limited constitutional government and private property.

The widespread preaching of, and belief in, the Gospel of Justification by Faith Alone created a whole new civilization in the nations influenced by the Reformation. And not only that, but the political implications of the Reformation created a whole new system of international relations called the Westphalian World Order (WWO).

Pre-Westphalian Europe was a mixture of declining empires, retreating feudal lords and an emerging class of traders and capitalist entrepreneurs with the Church remaining very influential as an instrument of European governance. The Treaty of Westphalia of 1648, brought to an end the Thirty Years’ War, the first pan-European war in history. Under the terms of the peace settlement, a number of countries were confirmed in their sovereignty over territories. They were empowered to contract treaties with one another and with foreign powers. In a nutshell the central authority of the empire was replaced almost entirely by the sovereignty of about 300 princes. The Peace Treaty was a turning point in the mutual recognition of sovereignty rights. Although the signatories of the treaty had only the peace of Europe as their ultimate objective, the unintended consequence of their efforts was to create a global order based on a “State System” (KImon Valaskakis, Westphalia II: The Real Millennium Challenge).

While it may seem like common sense to some, the idea that a nation state has the right to conduct its own affairs free from outside influence was a revolutionary idea in its time. Inspired by the Reformation, the vested powers of the day, most notably the Roman Church-State – note well that Valaskakis mentions that “the Church remain[ed] very influential as an instrument of European governance – fought against Westphalian Sovereignty and the emerging WWO with all their might. But simply put, the good guys won, the bad guys lost, and a new and better civilization emerged from feudal darkness.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: