Posted by: Dr Churchill | October 18, 2020

SapioSociety

There is a longing for communion with others who share a large vision for our world, and as many have described — this is akin to love…

“The immense fulfillment of the friendship between those engaged in furthering the evolution of consciousness has a quality impossible to describe.”

–Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

Yours,

Dr Churchill

PS:

Meet me in DC this week for more talks about our unity, our duty to stay peaceful and to be respectful, and about our place in creation to further our Civilization, through the highest public good, that is “Peace” for our People, both here and abroad in the World…

Being a whistleblower carries many risks, yet it also has immeasurable rewards as well.

So, please listen to St Paul as he beseeches the Ephesian Christians in his epistle to take no part in the worthless deeds of evil and darkness, but instead, to expose them…

How cool and refreshing these words are to my ears…

And he goes on to say: “Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.”

Here the great man only says this: Do not associate with those who continually live in darkness and oppose God’s way of life, but rather expose sin for what it is, by comparing it to God’s light.

Do this because a person living life in darkness is blinded by wickedness and hopelessness. …

Most people can be quite pessimistic, with the belief that they will dwell forever in this dark world, and that the bright side of life is all but impossible to find, but that is absolutely not true…

So if you choose to know that the light dwells within you — then you can just as easily look at the bright side Life and consequently dwell within the glory of God and his abundant Grace, always carrying the light of Love within your heart.

Yours,

Dr Churchill

PS:

Be the gift of Life, Truth & Justice.

And always remember to give of yourself…

Posted by: Dr Churchill | October 16, 2020

Two sides of the same earth we all share…


Two good men stood inopposite corners of the world.


Each faced the same sky.


And each held a wish.


The first, that his children follow in his footsteps.

Footsteps clothed in education, privilege and the anticipation of greatness.


The second, that his children make it through the night past the hunger, pain and disease.


If the first man could conceive the pain that beset the second — he might be able to travel beyond mere pedantic life and reach all the way to greatness…


And if the second man could catch just a glimpse of the compassion held in the first man’s new found gaze — he might see light where there had been only darkness.

It seems that the experience of each man might hold the key for the liberation the transcendence and the upliftment of the other.

And it further appears that togetherness of understanding and compassion — has always been the sole opportunity of this human race to lift itself up from the shadows and into the Light.

Yours,

Dr Churchill

PS:

Please do keep in mind that simple things in Life, because it is only compassion, kindness and mere basic goodness that’s required of all of us if we are to coexist in respectful peace, in loving community and in happy harmony…

In the midst of a Bloody Civil War and on hallowed and bloody ground on November 19th of 1863, Abraham Lincoln’s words forever defined the promise of a democratic free nation — a promise that now comes perilously close to being unfulfilled due to the Evil of Totalitarianism in our response to the pandemic of panic and fear that we are coursing through in todays October leading to the November elections of 2020.

No other Leader in history has spoken more eloquently, more bravely and more effectively in his succinct words in favor of the Cause of Justice, Freedom and Democracy, than Abraham Lincoln the 16th President of these United States did, during the midst of the Civil War speaking on the field of honor for the fallen of the bloodiest battle the Union has ever fought… 

And because his clear and inspiring words were needed more than ever, after the three-day bloodletting near the town of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania during the Civil War, it fell on President Lincoln to deliver those words —  a mere 272 words in total — at a formal dedication and commemoration ceremony for the fallen soldiers of both warring sides, in Gettysburg on a rainy gray November day, the 19th of the year 1863. 

And since a century and a half (157 years) has passed after Lincoln’s Gettysburg address, the drums of Civil War are booming again in our country, as the hateful rhetoric coupled with political divisions cloud our judgement, threaten to tear asunder the fabric of our country and are readying to super our ship of State and sink our Republic for ever.

Indeed our very existence as a nation is threatened, as our “Raison D’Etre” called into question and as our Democracy is imperiled, during this period of unrest and chaotic discourse running throughout our country.

So this is the time that begs us to take another look at the famous Gettysburg remarks that our Great Emancipator, Abraham Lincoln the 16th president of these United States offered, back then for the fallen of that awful engagement in the field of blood, honor and mud — the bloodiest battle of the Nation that was conducted, in the midst of the First Civil War, where despite the combined casualties of over 51,000 men, the three-day battle of Gettysburg was not declared the decisive victory, the Union or the Confederacy forces and leadership had originally hoped for…

As always Civil Wars never have any clear winners or losers, but rather many victims and casualties of hate, division and discord.

Indeed, two more years of terrible and all consuming “brotherly” fighting would follow the battle of Gettysburg, on the way to the vaunted Emancipation, well before the First American Civil War would come to a quiet end of hostilities, the death of Abraham Lincoln and the beginning of the Reconstruction and Restoration of Democracy and the Union.

Yet, back in the hallowed ground of Gettysburg, on that gray day of November 19th of 1863, the dedication ceremony of the war memorial was offered a scant four months after the battle had ended, and the human remains were still being buried and reinterred as Union people came together to commemorate the battle and memorialize the Field of Honor.

Lincoln at Gettysburg, offered simple and yet pivotal words that remade America, according to the historian Garry Wills who wrote of a nurse at the time who “shuddered at the all-too-visible ‘rise and swell of human bodies’” as they still lay desiccating in the fresh graves. 

Lincoln was not the designated keynote speaker for the ceremony. That honor went to Edward Everett of Massachusetts, considered at the time to be America’s greatest living orator. Everett spoke for two hours before Lincoln rose to give his brief remarks. 

Before an estimated audience of 15,000, many of whom couldn’t hear all that was being said, Lincoln spoke from his own script for almost three minutes. He was interrupted by applause five times.

Contrary to popular myth, Lincoln did not write out his remarks on the back of an envelope while on a train in the few hours preceding the ceremony. He was a man who knew the power of his own rhetoric and gave great consideration to each and every word he wrote. As a writer he based his craft on rewriting multiple drafts over a period of days. Gettysburg was no exception.

Throughout what has come to be known as the Gettysburg Address, Lincoln never once mentions directly the Union or the Confederacy or slavery  — the three key components behind the struggle at hand.

Likewise, he never mentions the town of Gettysburg itself.

On this occasion he was aiming for higher meaning and greater purpose — that being the defense of the proposition that democracy on this earth should not perish…

Lincoln’s unmatched skill when it came to language and his near-poetic selection of words at every turn, makes his speechifying to be elevated to that of Artistic masterpiece.

As a matter of fact, Lincoln’s personal secretary John Nicolay once described the Gettysburg Address as “one of the world’s masterpieces in rhetorical art.”

One hundred and fifty-seven years later, few would disagree.

Yes, Lincoln was a self-taught writer and storyteller well aware of the power of words. But he was also a politician, a lawyer by trade, and commander-in-chief in the middle of the deadliest war in a young nation’s history. In that light, it must be remembered that the Gettysburg Address was not preordained or heaven-sent. It was very  much a man-made document that, while soon to become an immortal work of genius, started out with a more strategic goal in mind.

Abraham Lincoln was up for reelection the following year, 1864, and he was convinced that if he were not reelected the Union would not survive. The dedication of a new cemetery provided the perfect opportunity for him to state his case, and thus the nation’s case, that the original idea of a free and united nation, as set forth by the Declaration of Independence, was still worth fighting for.

And maybe as good students of History, we can recognize that these ideals are worth “Now more than Ever.”

So, at two o’clock in the afternoon of November 19th, it was finally Lincoln’s turn to speak. After being introduced, he rose from his seat on the speaker’s platform and stepped forward. Pulling out two folded pages from his coat, he waited patiently for the crowd to be quiet. Then slowly and deliberately he began to speak:

“Four score and seven 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. 

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. 

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

The reaction to his ‘brief remarks’ was swift and unanimous. Newspapers quickly circulated the text far and wide, and a stronger vision of Lincoln and the cause for which the Union was fighting for, immediately, emerged.

Edward Everett wrote to the President the next day: “I should be glad, if I could flatter myself that I came as near to the central idea of the occasion in two hours as you did in two minutes.”

The Gettysburg address and the generalized reactions to it, certainly contributed to Lincoln’s winning reelection in the elections of 1864.


Yet it is worth remembering that this speech also sealed the fate of Lincoln, the Slaves, and of the Emancipated Union of the American States as well, to he process, or to the spark that lies at the heart of Democracy, and that is the individual freedom.

People at Liberty choosing to self govern themselves by freely elected representative is the fount of all Democracy now and in the past.

But what of the future?

A future that is marred by totalitarianism…

A future where all human freedom can be curtailed at the blink of an eye because of the sickness of the state and its powerful agents who smother all those who seek to be Free?

What happened in Gettysburg in the year 1863, comes to us in words that are immortal.

Indeed, Lincoln’s words will never lose their power, but their meaning has already been lost in the debates over masks, vaccines and politics in the Covid-19 era of hate, discord and division.

And although these words are forever etched in stone, as part of our nation’s heritage and uniqueness on the world’s stage — today’s reality reflects the fact that we have already forgotten their meaning at our peril.

That, too, shall not perish…

And that is why today — I have my doubts about the resilience of Democracy and of our Constitutional Republic.

Because we are treading through a time of generalized Mass Hysteria that allows for all sorts of Evil to transcend with here.

And ultimately, this is the enemy of Democracy.

Because Evil deals in falsehoods and fallacies that are perpetuated in the interest of the rekindling of a new Civil War.

Civil War 2.0 is upon us, because this current agreed-upon general delusion, and mass panic, cause a complete suspension of disbelief amongst the population at large.

And indeed this mass delusion is the one thing that makes it difficult for us to see the destruction of our Democracy and consequently to deal with the massive forces of Evil hiding in plain sight within our society and agitating for our destruction working deep in our midst.

And because our governance systems act in accord with our media, with our enemies, and apparently with all of our security services — in short the system as we use the word now — this situation becomes the best breeding ground for our seeds of mutual destruction.

And if our Safety net, and our mental fugue, and tiredness coupled with the mental laxity of our people under the strain of this elusive pandemic — is the hiding place for Evil, or rather for the unconsciousness totalitarian state machine, or for the “deadness” of the individual Spirit in the words of St Paul — then we must rebel against it and follow the norms of our Christian faith above all else.

Because as both St Thomas Aquinas and author C. S. Lewis taught us — the triumph of evil depends entirely on his disguise within the trusted power structures of Society, where our “ego” can see it as some form of goodness and virtue so that we can buy into it, observe its norms and force others to submit to it as well. [1] [2]

Therefore, evil depends on a “good” disguise, cultural virtue and religion are the very best covers of all. As you might recall it was the Jewish faithful mob, the multitude of people led by the demagogues of the two leading Jewish parties of the day — the Pharisees and the Sadducees, coordinating with the leaders of the current Religious, State, and even of the Roman empire, that all together colluded in the killing of Jesus Christ ranging the evil deed on the evening of the Sabbath. (Matthew 27:1–2).

Yet, in St Luke’s gospel — it was the Pharisees and the Sadducees who whipped up the crowds into a frenzy, while King Herod and Pontius Pilate, passed judgement on Jesus Christ by pushing him back and forth, like the swaying pendulum — always affirming whatever the other one said (St Luke 23:12).

So it is no wonder today, that after that foundational debacle of a miscarriage of Justice and the State sponsored Murder of an Innocent Man — all Christians are forewarned that the highest levels of power can and probably will be co-opted by evil and they will do his biding wantonly.

Now of course, someone has to ask this: Is there a culture in this world that does not operate out of this recipe for delusion?

This is what St Paul means when he names “the world,” or what we call “the system,” as one of the sources of evil, because that which St Paul already recognized intuitively, is that it is almost impossible for any social grouping of a bureaucratic power, and of a political power, to be corporately or consistently selfless.

Because every power structure has first and foremost to contend with its own longevity as its primary goal. And thus it simply has to maintain and promote itself at virtually any cost — therefore sacrificing even its own stated ethics and morality to that illusory self affirming goal.

Now, of course — if we can see this — this might reveal the depth of the disguise of institutionalized evil.

To heed and understand this concept — please consider the rationale for the NAZI destruction of the Jews of Europe in their Final Solution doctrine as promoted by their theoretical basis of Jews being “Inhuman, Rats and Money hungry” and an object to the development of the Aryan race that needed to fulfill its potential and it living space for a Homeland free of vermin and contagious sickness that the Jews carried apparently with them. Does that remind you of the current rationale of excluding the unmasked and unvaccinated people from our Society, especially now that we progress towards a qualified “Herd Immunity” based on a State Sponsored and State Administered Vaccine?

Hitler’s rhetoric, his irrational rationale, and the very essence of the “final solution” doctrine of the German army, led by the National Socialist party ideologues and rank and file members as well as all the members of the Gestapo, the SS, the Hitler youth, the brownshirts and of the whole of the German Society — was based on the “Good German” civilians cooperating with the vast bureaucratic machinery of the German state, since all of them were believers in the mass delusion that Jews had to be exterminated because they represented a sickness within the German society and life as cancer in the body has to be extracted, to save the host.

Martin Heidegger and Nietzsche presented the philosophical underpinnings of the NAZI cannon, but it was the state induced mass hysteria of the German people that turned everyone into a snitch and a police informant as a person that pushed the nice Jewish family to the hands of the Gaolers, and send them all as a People to the concentration Death camps and to the Gas chambers, willingly and knowingly — even though these Jews were their neighbors, their coworkers, their lifetime confidants, and often times the trusted family Doctors, lawyers, teachers, professors and even personal friends.

None of that mattered. The Jews were sent to their Death by the Good German people who were led to fear the “Sickness” carried by the Jews and thus to avoid the miasma, they sent them to their death.

How is that for a parallel to today’s world where the elderly in nursing home facilities are required to cohabit with the Covid-19 patients who are sent to their death, amidst the elderly invalids that are sequestered aways form family and friends in what today amounts to a modern care facility akin to a modern Death Camp?

Perhaps more distanced and less nerve raking for the fragile amongst you, would be the philosophical explantation based on the writings and the philosophies of religious rationale for the “Doctrine of Discovery,” which justified the ruthless and bloody conquest of America by the Conquistadors, and the African slave-trade, as seen in the “Doctrine of Discovery” that emerged from a series of fifteenth-century papal bulls, which are official decrees by the pope that carry the full weight of his ecclesiastical ecumenical and worldly power of the Pontifical office, from where on May 4th of the year of the Lord 1493 — the first year after Columbus sailed West through the vast blue ocean — Pope Alexander VI issued the papal bull “Inter Caetera” and offered a spiritual validation for the European conquest, “that in our times especially the Catholic faith and the Christian religion be exalted and be everywhere increased and spread. . . .”

This particular Papal Bull of the “Inter Caetera” gave theological permission for the European body and mind to view themselves as superior to the non-European bodies and minds. The doctrine created a separate identity for African Peoples, as inferior and only worthy of subjugation; as it also relegated the identity of the original inhabitants of the “discovered lands” to become outsiders, now unwelcome in their own land, subject to extermination or to a reduced life as impotent refugees in their own homes, cities, towns and villages within their own countries. [3]

“Evil finds its almost perfect camouflage in the silent agreements of the group when it appears personally advantageous, politically correct, and sanctioned by an all powerful majority consensus opinion.”

–Plato

Such unconscious evil, “deadness” and totalitarianism, will continue to show itself in every age, and this is why we cannot forget that the “sin” of our world is still within us, on the “here and now.”

And it is our willful blindness to Evil that allows for this to transpire, because if we do not see the true shape of evil, or if we fail to recognize how we are fully complicit in his work today — it will surely subsume us, consume us and fully control us, while not looking the least bit like the sinful evilness that we personally seek to atone for in all of our virtue signaling, in our prayers, and in our faithful devotions to our religious principles to our political and personal philosophies and/or to our principles — whether we have one of these or not.

Therefore, the “agreed-upon delusion” of today’s “Masked Majority,” the insufferable suffering of the “mass hysteria” of the “vaccinated plurality” and the suspension of disbelief of the personal Evil that we are perpetrating against “the other” by dehumanizing “the stranger” today — is the basis of why we are all going to Hell in a hand basket along with our Country and Life as a United Nation…

And since this is done in the name of the elusive Covid-19 panic epidemic — this pure Evil in our midst and in our actions, is strengthened within us, because we cannot recognize or overcome it, as isolated individuals, since it is held together by the group consensus, and by the State policy of Apartheid against the non-conforming ones.

Do you think for one moment that President Lincoln would approve of this?

Think again…

Yours,

Dr Churchill

PS:

[1] St Thomas Aquinas describes the devil’s deception through evil “that has a semblance of good” in his meditation on the Lord’s Prayer. See The Three Greatest Prayers: Commentaries on the Lord’s Prayer, the Hail Mary, and the Apostles’ Creed, based on trans. by Laurence Shapcote (Sophia Institute Press: 1990), 152.

[2] C S Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters (1942) offers numerous examples of the ways evil presents itself as desirable.

[3] Mark Charles and Soong-Chan Rah, Unsettling Truths: The Ongoing, Dehumanizing Legacy of the Doctrine of Discovery (InterVarsity Press: 2019), 15, 19, 21.

Judgement and decision making are essential.

They are automatic, intuitive and rapid mental operations, which can be statistical or non-statistical, that lead an individual to make a decision and which are very interesting in electoral sociology, particularly at the time of elections.

Individuals thus make choices according to a number of considerations that are both rational and rational, although most often they do not realize the complexity of the information relevant to the situation and the real stakes at this high level Cybernetics game of Life and the Pursuit of Happiness for the American people and by extension for all the people of this planet.

Indeed voters are sometimes led to biases and errors in decision making.

In political science, there are three main competing models for explaining electoral behavior.

The first, sociological in nature, is based on the postulate of an effect of socio-economic variables (gender, age, social class, etc.).

The second is based on a theory of a psycho-sociological nature: the voter chooses his or her candidate through a partisan identification that guides his or her choice.

And finally, the third, inspired by economic models, assumes a rational voter who makes political choices by maximizing his or her interests.

As a matter of fact, nine heuristics in total can be easily distinguished in electoral sociology.

Thus, one is a little lost at the time of the vote.

One then votes like a sheep … or rather more like the rest of the “sheeple.”

And thus as one decides to vote as the majority of individuals vote, because one tells oneself that if the majority chooses this or that other candidate, it is certainly the best.

Or one can choose to vote by a phenomenon of identification for a woman, because one is a female voter.

Or because a candidate is beautiful.

Or because the candidate embodies success, strength and other very subjective criteria.

Or one votes by conservative upbringing or by tradition or as everyone else “in the family” votes etc.

Indeed as voters, we are attached to the fact that we have always voted for this or that political party…

Or because we recognize ourselves through a political program, through ideas…

And this last one is more serious, but it still presupposes a person to be enlightened, which is seldom the case for most all of us, being simpletons and simple voters.

HOWEVER, all these factors must be taken into account.

Mainly, because these factors are the ones that influence the choice of voters at the time of the vote.

Yours,

Dr Churchill

PS:

Yet buyer or in this case “Voter” beware…

Beware of cognitive bias!

Find out what is really essential and then vote accordingly.

Do you like Independent?

Do you suppose that there exists a real knowledge of the stakes for a country placed in a global environment without forgetting the environmental stakes today, which threaten us all?

Are we all capable of analyzing reliable information in a context of disinformation and daily infox, especially on social networks? Are we all really aware of reality?

Are we really aware of what’s at stake and what the threats are for the environment, and for the people?

Maybe yes — and maybe not.

It is in these cases that I like to quote Hannah Arendt, philosopher, survivor of the Holocaust, girlfriend of the NAZI philosopher Heidegger, and subsequently a specialist on totalitarianism:

“It is in the void of thought that evil is transcribed”.

Democracy is good, but it also contains its own poison.

The allegory of the forest leads us to think:

“Before the axe entered the forest, all people cried out: ‘Fear nothing, it is one of us!'”

— Thanks to Fabienne Durand who wrote this in the first place and I borrowed and mashed it rip for your edification.

God Bless all of you.

Posted by: Dr Churchill | October 3, 2020

The Deficit Myth…

The Deficit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory and the Birth of the People’s Economy.

Authored by Stephanie Kelton…

Book Review by LSE

In the book, “The Deficit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory and the Birth of the People’s Economy” author Stephanie Kelton dispels six key myths that have shaped the conventional understanding of deficits as inherently bad, instead arguing that deficits can strengthen economies and lead to faster growth. This book is a triumph, writes Professor Hans G. Despain, shifting normative grounds of government spending away from the false and unproductive idea that deficits are irresponsible and ruinous towards the productive political activity of deciding which spending programmes should be prioritised.

Countries across the globe have shut down their economies in an effort to combat COVID-19.  Massive increases in government spending have offered relief to households and businesses, but according to many politicians and economists, this government spending has generated ‘national debt dilemmas.’

The United States and the United Kingdom are projected to have public debt levels soar above 100 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP). Japan’s public debt to GDP ratio is expected to grow above 250 per cent. The IMF anticipates the average debt-to-GDP ratios in advanced economies will rise above 120 per cent.

With debt-to-GDP ratios so high, mainstream economists warn there will be a debt overhang post-pandemic, which they proclaim will force a curtailment of public spending in the future and an increase in taxes. The increased taxes will lower consumption spending of households and investment spending of businesses. The result is slower GDP growth and stagnation in worker’s wages and salaries.

Stephanie Kelton, in her new book The Deficit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory and the Birth of the People’s Economy, demonstrates that concerns about public debt overhang are ill-founded. Kelton argues that government spending properly targeted and government debt need not be problematic. Indeed, she argues that public deficits can be very healthy for an economy.  Kelton contends bigger deficits can strengthen an economy and lead to faster growth.

However, the conventional wisdom regarding deficits is that they impede economic growth and weaken the economy. Conventional wisdom warns against using ‘deficits to solve problems [when] we continue to think of the deficit itself as a problem’ (8).

Currently the US national debt is more than $24 trillion, 106 per cent of GDP.  However, $6 trillion of the national debt is held by government agencies such as the Social Security Trust Fund. If it seems strange the federal government can owe itself money, well indeed, federal debt is strange.

This strangeness is one of the reasons so many ‘myths’ cloud our understanding of public debt.  Kelton identifies six primary myths of public debt. The first six chapters of her book dispel each primary myth. Chapters Seven and Eight explain how deficit can be used to generate a stronger economy with shared prosperity to reduce inequality and other social ills. In so doing, Kelton’s book achieves two groundbreaking triumphs and has one major ‘shortcoming’.

First, the shortcoming. Kelton’s argument is based on modern monetary theory (MMT), which hinges on a critique of the orthodox view of money.  The orthodox view of money asserts that the value of money is based historically on its link to precious metals and especially on its function as a medium of exchange. MMT contends the value of (modern) money derives from its link to credit (and debt) and underscores the important role the state plays regarding the ontology of money. George Knapp (1924) called this ‘the state theory of money’, J.M. Keynes further developed it in The Treatise on Money (1930), and it has been most recently promoted by L. Randall Wray (1998) and Warren Mosler (1993).

Kelton does not address the ontology of money of MMT. This can be seen as a shortcoming because it leaves a theoretical understanding of MMT undeveloped. However, my reading of Kelton has the shortcoming as a great strength, because it makes her argument far more accessible to a wider readership. Moreover, MMT’s more esoteric theoretical and historical accounts of money are available elsewhere (e.g. Wray, 1998).

Kelton’s groundbreaking triumphs are twofold. The first is that Kelton shatters both the deficit hawk and deficit dove view of public debt. Deficit hawks constitute the conventional wisdom on debt and contend the government is being irresponsible when it has a deficit, and therefore needs to balance its budget at almost any cost. Deficit hawks argue that public debt is ruinous to a currency and the country itself. Deficit hawks argue a country should tighten its purse strings and suffer short-term consequences to avoid long-term disaster. Deficit doves agree, but contend deficits can be used in the short term for emergencies and overcoming economic crises.

Kelton contends this leaves the debate stuck in the faulty idea that deficits are sinful.  According to Kelton, we need to change our perspective and be wiser regarding deficits. Kelton calls herself a ‘deficit owl’ because owls have the ability to rotate their heads nearly 360 degrees for better perspectives and are associated with wisdom (76).

The conventional story contends governments levy taxes and then use them to pay for government spending. If government spending is greater than tax revenues, the government must borrow the rest by issuing bonds to investors (21-24). The conventional story contends government borrowing comes with huge snares. The increase in demand from loans increases interest rates. Government borrowing, via selling bonds, competes for the limited amount of savings so that private investment tends to fall, or gets ‘crowded-out’ (101-104), and GDP slows.  Further, deficits make a country dependent on overseas investors (81-84).

Kelton contends the conventional story is a series of myths. To begin with, Kelton takes on the myth that governments should be fiscally run like a household (Chapter One). This is false because the government is nothing close to a household or private business. The big difference is that households and businesses are users of money, while governments are issuers of money (17 – 18).

Think of it this way: if you were granted the legal right and the ability to print as many US dollars as you wished, would that change your debt? The answer, of course, is yes. Your debt would no longer matter, because you can always just print more money.

Second, to view public deficits as overspending is a myth (Chapter Two), because a government deficit creates a surplus for someone else. The third myth is that deficits burden the next generation (Chapter Three). It is false that deficits make the next generation poorer, and it is also false that reducing deficits will make the next generation richer. Rather, the historical record shows high national debt creates wealth and increases the income of the next generation.

The fourth myth is that deficits crowd out private business (Chapter Four). Kelton argues that deficit spending properly targeted stimulates, or ‘crowds-in’, private business growth. The fifth myth is that deficits make us dependent on overseas nations (Chapter Five).  Instead trade deficits should be understood as a ‘stuff’ surplus: e.g. China gets US Treasury bonds, and the US gets Apple computers and other ‘stuff’. The sixth myth is that Social Security and public health programmes are propelling us toward a fiscal crisis (Chapter Six); here, Kelton shows the governments can always meet demographic and healthcare fiscal obligations.

The current surge in public expenditure given the sudden economic shutdown is quite telling and supports Kelton’s argument. The government is self-financing: they do not necessarily need to collect taxes or borrow; they simply need to pay the dollars for the work activity they want accomplished. They cannot run out of money any more than a score keeper of a football game can run out of points. So long as a country is sovereign in its currency – that is, it issues and controls the supply of its currency (for instance, the UK and US governments) – it cannot run out of currency.

Government debt does matter, but we need to shift our understanding. Government debt is nothing like personal debt, because the federal government can issue more money. Nonetheless, it is not the imbalance between taxes collected and federal monies spent that matters. Rather what matters is the balance of real resources (257 – 260), to avoid generating bottlenecks, and the threat of inflation (44-47).

In the present moment, inflation is no threat whatsoever. The severe lack of consumption demand from households and investment demand from businesses makes deflation a greater worry than inflation. Once the economy begins to recover, policymakers will have to keep their eye on inflation. Nonetheless, for nearly 40 years, inflation has been well controlled. Partially this is due to international supply-chain competition and the business models of big corporations (Amazon, Wal-Mart, etc) that are built on low prices. There are several forces that will keep low inflation intact.

With no inflation and no bottlenecks, the government can address the true deficits (Chapter Seven), such as the good jobs deficit, the healthcare deficit, the education deficit, the infrastructure deficit, the green climate deficit and the democracy deficit, with no fiscal constraint. As such, Kelton contends the normative side of MMT should support building an economy that is geared toward people over profits and people over balanced budgets (Chapter Eight).

Kelton produces a dual shift in perspective. First, she demonstrates fiscal policy measures outdo monetary policy for steering, stabilising and managing the economy. Second, which specific fiscal policy measures are preferred are more a matter of politics and social preference than the science of economics. As Kelton states, the normative implications of her argument ‘can be used to defend policies that are traditionally more liberal (e.g. Medicare for all, free college, or middle-class tax cuts) or more conservative (e.g. military spending or corporate tax cuts)’ (235).

To be sure, the MMT tradition has promoted a job guarantee as the best fiscal buffer for the capitalist boom-bust cycle. Further, they have emphasised a guaranteed jobs programme should be built around public service and a ‘care’ economy. However, someone could fully agree with Kelton’s economics and disagree with her suggested priority of fiscal measures.

Kelton’s book achieves a revolution in political economy. Kelton’s first great achievement leaves the conventional hawk/dove conception of deficits shattered. She decisively shows there is no budgetary constraint on government spending; instead the only real constraints on government spending are the limits of real resources and the threat of inflation. Kelton’s second great achievement is to shift the normative grounds of government spending from the false and unproductive idea that federal deficits are evil, and to the productive political activity of deciding which spending programmes should be prioritised. Her Copernican achievements furthermore make esoteric debates on money accessible to a wide audience and wonky ‘pie-in-the-sky’ policy debates both comprehensible and realistic.

The context of the current economic shutdown will place modern monetary theory and The Deficit Myth centre stage. Stephanie Kelton is the economist to carry this debate forward.

Yours,

Dr Churchill

PS:

Think along these lines about the non-fiat money as well, where all the digital & cryptocurrencies tread…

Food for thought for all of your beloved Crypto traders.

What is there to back up your non-fiat currency?

….

Air

….

Understood?

Posted by: Dr Churchill | September 25, 2020

Einstein & Spinoza…

When Einstein gave lectures at U.S. universities, the recurring question that students asked him most was this one:

Q:

Do you believe in God?

And Einstein always answered thus:

A:

I believe in the God of Spinoza.

Interesting…

Baruch de Spinoza was a Dutch philosopher considered one of the great rationalists of 17th century philosophy, along with Descartes.

Philosopher Spinoza wrote that God would say this:

Stop praying.

What I want you to do is go out into the world and enjoy your life.

I want you to sing, have fun and enjoy everything I’ve made for you.

Stop going into those dark, cold temples that you built yourself and saying they are my house.

My house is in the mountains, in the woods, rivers, lakes, beaches.

That’s where I live and there I express my love for you.

Stop blaming me for your miserable life; I never told you there was anything wrong with you or that you were a sinner, or that your sexuality was a bad thing.

Sex is a gift I have given you and with which you can express your love, your ecstasy, your joy. So don’t blame me for everything they made you believe.Stop reading alleged sacred scriptures that have nothing to do with me. If you can’t read me in a sunrise, in a landscape, in the look of your friends, in your son’s eyes … you will find me in no book!

Stop asking me “will you tell me how to do my job?” Stop being so scared of me. I do not judge you or criticize you, nor get angry, or bothered. I am pure love.

Stop asking for forgiveness, there’s nothing to forgive. If I made you… I filled you with passions, limitations, pleasures, feelings, needs, inconsistencies… free will. How can I blame you if you respond to something I put in you? How can I punish you for being the way you are, if I’m the one who made you?

Do you think I could create a place to burn all my children who behave badly for the rest of eternity? What kind of god would do that?

Respect your peers and don’t do what you don’t want for yourself.

All I ask is that you pay attention in your life, that alertness is your guide.My beloved, this life is not a test, not a step on the way, not a rehearsal, nor a prelude to paradise.

This life is the only thing here and now and it is all you need.I have set you absolutely free, no prizes or punishments, no sins or virtues, no one carries a marker, no one keeps a record.

You are absolutely free to create in your life. Heaven or hell. I can’t tell you if there’s anything after this life but I can give you a tip. Live as if there is not. As if this is your only chance to enjoy, to love, to exist.

So, if there’s nothing after, then you will have enjoyed the opportunity I gave you.

And if there is, rest assured that I won’t ask if you behaved right or wrong, instead I’ll ask this:

Did you like it?

Did you have fun?

What did you enjoy the most?

What did you learn?

Stop believing in me; believing is assuming, guessing, imagining. I don’t want you to believe in me, I want you to believe in you. I want you to feel me in you when you kiss your beloved, when you tuck in your little girl, when you caress your dog, when you bathe in the sea.

Stop praising me, what kind of egomaniac God do you think I am?I’m bored being praised. I’m tired of being thanked. Feeling grateful? Prove it by taking care of yourself, your health, your relationships, the world. Express your joy!

That’s the way to praise me.Stop complicating things and repeating as a parakeet what you’ve been taught about me.What do you need more miracles for? So many explanations?

The only thing for sure is that you are here, that you are alive, that this world is full of wonders.

–Spinoza

Yours,

Dr Churchill

Posted by: Dr Churchill | September 21, 2020

The Pandemic Is Widening The Racial Wealth Gap in the United States.

September 18, 20205:01 AM ET

By: RHITU CHATTERJEE LISTEN· 4:354-Minute ListenAdd to PLAYLIST

Blacks, Latinos and Native Americans have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic's economic impact.Nicole Xu for NPR

Joeller Stanton used to be an assistant teacher at a private school in Baltimore and made about $30,000 a year. In mid-March, when the pandemic was just starting, her school closed for what was supposed to be two weeks. “Up to that point, we were under the impression that it wasn’t that serious, that everything was going to be OK,” Stanton recalls.

But as schools in Maryland switched to virtual learning indefinitely, Stanton was let go from her job. She received her last paycheck in March. “I had about $300 savings that was basically gone by the end of March,” she says.

She says she applied for unemployment but was denied initially. And by April, she had no money to pay for rent and utilities, and was struggling to put food on the table for her two children.

Stanton, who is Black, is caught up in a huge wave of economic stress hitting Americans, especially people of color.Article continues after sponsor message

Coronavirus in America: Families In Crisis

Sixty percent of Black households are facing serious financial problems since the pandemic began, according to a national poll released this week by NPR, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. That includes 41% who say they’ve used up most or all their savings, while an additional 10% had no savings before the outbreak.

Latinos and Native Americans are also disproportionately affected by the pandemic’s economic impact. Seventy-two percent of Latino and 55% of Native American respondents say their households are facing serious financial problems, compared with 36% of whites.

“The thing that immediately struck me was how large the gap was by race for the people who said they were facing serious problems,” says Valerie Wilson, director of the Program on Race, Ethnicity and the Economy at the Economic Policy Institute.

The pandemic’s disproportionate financial impact on communities of color reflects — and is worsening — existing racial disparities in wealth, she adds.

Struggles with income, housing, food

“The three groups that are being just ravaged by this epidemic are reporting unbelievable problems of just trying to cope with their day-to-day lives,” says Robert Blendon, professor emeritus of health policy and political analysis at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, who oversaw the poll.

SHOTS – HEALTH NEWS 

About 1 In 5 Households In U.S. Cities Miss Needed Medical Care During Pandemic 

Thirty-two percent of Latino and 28% of Black respondents say they’re having problems paying rent or mortgages. About a third of respondents in both groups were struggling to pay credit cards or other loans. And 26% of Latino and Native American respondents say they struggle to afford food, while 22% of Black respondents do. 

Among households that reported they lost income, survival is even more of a challenge. For Black respondents, 40% say they’re struggling to pay rent or mortgage, and 43% say they’re having trouble paying utilities. For Latino households that lost income, 46% say they’re struggling to pay mortgage or rent. About a third of both Black and Latino respondents who lost household income said they’re struggling to pay for food.

The fact that many minority groups are also experiencing higher rates of coronavirus infections makes it even harder for them to cope financially, Blendon adds.

“You have people who don’t have savings, they can’t pay bills,” he says. “And then you’re going to tell them, ‘Well, somebody in the household tested positive, nobody can go work.’ How are they going to keep their lives going?”

Stanton’s sister, who works for the city government, got COVID-19 earlier this year and had to isolate in her basement. “She had a cough, and she couldn’t eat because her taste buds were completely gone,” Stanton says. “I would cook meals, and I would take it to the basement, put it down on the floor for her.”

Luckily, she says, no one else in the family — including her 82-year-old mother and her 7-year-old son, who has asthma — got infected.

But Stanton says she has lost a sister-in-law to the disease and had a friend in coma for six weeks on a ventilator. She knows of many others in her community who have died. 

And most of her co-workers and friends are out of work.

Worsening existing disparities

Even during the economic recovery of recent years, minority groups were lagging behind, says Wilson of the Economic Policy Institute. “There were significant racial disparities in wages, significant racial disparities in unemployment, significant racial disparities in the kinds of jobs people held.”

Black, Latino and Native American workers were more likely to have jobs that were lost during the pandemic, Wilson says. A Harvard University analysis of the U.S. Census Bureau’s Pulse Survey, released in July, found that 58% of Latino and 53% of Black households experienced loss in earnings early in the pandemic. Wilson’s own research has shown that Latino workers have been particularly affected by job losses during the pandemic.

Wilson adds that people in these groups are also more likely to have jobs that didn’t allow them to work from the safety of their homes, therefore putting them more at risk of getting infected. And they’re also less likely to have substantial savings. As a result, it makes it harder for them to weather times of economic downturn, she says.

Wilson says she worries that the pandemic is worsening racial disparities.

“We’re going to see coming out of this pandemic an expansion of the racial wealth gap,” she says. “We saw the same kind of thing in the Great Recession in 2007-2008 — in particular then with the extensive foreclosures in communities of color and the loss of housing wealth.”

“You just pray”

The pandemic forced Stanton to give up her rental home back in April. But she says she was fortunate not to end up homeless, thanks to her sister.

“My sister helped me get a storage unit,” Stanton says. “I moved my furniture into a storage unit. And I moved in with my sister, me and my two kids — my 11-year-old daughter and my 7-year-old son.”

She is grateful to have a roof over her head, but money, she says, is still tight.

She now gets $280 a week from the state of Maryland as unemployment, but it doesn’t go far.

“The first thing I buy is any personal hygiene items me or my kids need,” she says. She buys food, above what food stamps get her; she pays her phone bill and covers her sister’s utility bills. “That’s my only way of telling her, ‘Thank you,’ to show her that I appreciate what she’s doing.”

What little she has left, she buys a treat or two for her children, who have mostly been stuck indoors since the pandemic began: “Just trying to keep them happy,” she says.

But she’s far from happy herself. She hasn’t been able to find a new job because of the nature of remote learning. “They don’t need an assistant right now because the kids are not physically in the building,” she says.

And even if she did find a job, she worries she’d have to use pay to cover child care. Her kids are now also learning virtually from home and need constant supervision.

Stanton says the only way she copes with her daily struggles is through faith. “A lot of prayer and a lot of patience,” she says. “I try not to let things bother me because I don’t want to become depressed. So, you know, you just pray. I hope this is all over soon.”

Yours,

Dr Churchill

PS:

The above is an excellent article from NPR and as such it is mashed up here in its entirety for your edification.

Posted by: Dr Churchill | September 20, 2020

Why Hate?

In case you have been sequestered for far long in house incarceration and you feel that you are under the heaviest rock in the world — let me alert you to the fact that we live in a time of incredible political division.

Most all of us have had the experience of talking to someone whose idea of reality seems to be completely different from our own.

As a matter of fact, today in all places and segments of society, family 7 community — it becomes difficult to have an argument in the traditional sense.

People with differing opinions are often no longer even working from the same commonly-accepted set of facts. It’s a problem that has a lot to do with changes in how we receive and digest information, especially through the news media.

During our lifetimes the core commercial strategy of the news business has changed radically, and that contributes to the division, hate and toxic poison that we all experience at the local, state and national level — because the news companies have moved far and away from trying to attract a big all inclusive audience and appeal to all Americans, and are now trying to divide our countrymen, in order to identify, capture and secure their niche small audiences that they treat and even call informally “Slaves” to their news fix.

Kind-a-like the typical slaves to the needle… that are littering the sidewalks of all metropolitan cities of America and beyond.

Yet in terms of a fundamental shift for the News Networks and for the major Mass Media corporations, this means that the press has gone from reporting a clean from emotion reality, steeped on journalistic principles and following the “Five ‘W’s” — “Who,” “What,” “When,” “Where,” and “Why,” because when referring back to the Five “W”s helps journalists address the fundamental questions that every story should be able to answer, and thus steer clear of their personal biases and ideological leanings.

And that was the principle of all cable companies journalism departments as well as all the newspapers, periodicals and radio & television businesses who wanted to be perceived as being acceptable to a broad audience.

Yet today, they seem to be selling simple straight up hate & division, because for technological, commercial, and political reasons this instinct of segmenting and dividing our Society has become far more profitable with a captive audience of “mental Slaves” and thus as a business practice it is now far more exaggerated and thus snowballing all of us toward the dysfunctional state of HATE & RANCOR that we have found ourselves in, today.

And here is a story that illustrates how the old system worked as it involves the first major national news broadcast, the CBS radio program anchored by the legendary Lowell Thomas.

History buffs will know Thomas.

His was the iconic voice on those old WWII newsreels:

Thomas began doing a national news program in 1930 and noticed something right away.

Years later he explained, “I had quickly discovered that my evening program was a perfect way to make listeners angry. You could step on millions of toes at the same time.”

Thomas had a creative background, having been an adventurer, explorer, and actor who’d toured the world doing one-man shows. He was excited about the possibilities of radio and wanted to find a way to capitalize on its provocative qualities, planning on publishing a book of listener letters called Making Millions Angry.

Thomas’s sponsors balked. One, the magazine The Literary Digest, asked him instead to “play things down the middle.” His publisher made him change Making Millions Angry to the lifeless title, Fan Mail.

Thomas committed to the “down the middle” strategy. His news show announced that it sought the widest possible audience through its famous introduction, “Good evening, everybody”:  

Thomas kept his feelings out of things and let audiences supply the emotion. He later called this “letting your listeners make up their own minds.”

We’d call this the “objective” style of reporting today, and it’s important to understand, this was not about ethics. It was a commercial strategy. The news made its money by attracting the largest possible audience, then allowing advertisers to court that audience. The thinking was, once you started injecting politics into the show, it reduced the number of potential customers who’d be susceptible to advertising.

This would the template for news for about fifty years. Anchors from Thomas through Dan Rather and Jessica Savitch delivered information in a reserved monotone. Print journalism was written in an even, unemotional, third-person voice.

Beginning in the early nineties however, several major changes altered the news & journalism business forever, to the point that now we are all hating the mass media because they are interpreting events instead of reporting them as they come…

So now we have the haters reporting news in a way that fits their own rose tinted or blue tinted eyeglasses and thus all the mental slaves who follow the news are afflicted by the appropriately colored malady of madness at the other side, the opposing team, or the few poor souls that happen to be Independents and thus unaligned free people…

So here are some additions to the Five Journalistic “W”s as imagined by the New Yorker magazine who put out this list as a serious dig at its established counterparts in the world of News Media.

PHOTOGRAPH BY DOUG MILLS  THE NEW YORK TIMES  REDUX

In journalism, the “Five ‘W’s” are “Who,” “What,” “When,” “Where,” and “Why.” Referring back to the Five “W”s helps journalists address the fundamental questions that every story should be able to answer. Recent events, however, have shown that traditional journalistic practices might not be working as effectively as they used to. As such, here are a few additions to the Five “W”s that will surely come in handy for today’s journalists.

The Two “A”s

“Are you fucking kidding me?”
These days, journalists will often be asked to report on things that sound like sick fucking jokes. As a reporter, you should always confirm that the event you’re covering is not a tasteless prank, misguided attempt at performance art, or some kind of depraved clown show in a demented carnival of vulgarity.

“Am I dreaming?”
When confronted with strange, unsettling events that seem to proceed according to their own unfathomable logic, reporters should also make sure they’re not having some kind of fever dream. What you’re seeing could very well just be a nightmare, but believe it or not, it might also be an actual event that is actually happening in the real world we actually live in—a reality from which there’s no escape.

The One “S”

“Seriously?”
Journalists should always look the person they’re interviewing in the eye and ask, “Seriously? You’re seriously saying that to me with a straight face?” (This question can be repeated as often as necessary.)

The Three “H”s

“How did this happen?”
This question used to be about making sense of the chain of events leading up to an incident, but now it’s more about how we all need to take a good hard look in the mirror and think about how the choices we’ve made brought us to where we are today.

“Have you no shame?”
The answer to this question is probably going to be “no,” but you’ve gotta check.

“Holy shit.”
True, this isn’t a question, but it’s an important perspective for journalists to keep in mind.

VIDEO FROM THE NEW YORKER

How Will Americans Vote During a Crisis?

The One “I”

“Is there no respite from the madness?”
This is a pretty basic question, which is relevant whether you’re reporting on global affairs, business, sports, or even just writing restaurant reviews.

The original Five “W”s can also be repurposed to greater effect. For example, instead of asking “What happened?,” a journalist in 2017 might ask “What kind of God would allow this to happen?,” “What the actual fuck?,” or “What’s the point?” Similarly, instead of asking “Where did this event take place?,” you might ask “Where did it all go wrong?” In lieu of “Why did this event take place?,” try “Why do bad things happen to good people?,” “Why do we live in this benighted, fallen world?,” or simply “Why . . . Why . . . Why?” These are the questions that people want answered.

It’s also now safe to discard one of the “W”s: “Who.” As in, “Who is responsible?” The answer to this question is the same in every story—it’s all of us. We all did it.

No one’s hands are clean.

Yours,

Dr Churchill

PS:

So, to recap:

In journalisms and in mass media, we now have Five “W”s, Two “A”s, One “S”, Three “H”s, and One “I.”

Keep these in mind, and you can be confident that you’re covering every angle of a story.

Sure, compared to the original system it’s vastly more complicated, confusing, and borderline incoherent in a way that seems to perfectly exemplify this bewildering new era in which the truth seems to have little meaning.

But that’s just the way we live now.

Sorry!

Posted by: Dr Churchill | September 16, 2020

Jesus Saves

As a Rabbi, as a Healer, and as a truly divine person — Jesus always cared for the poor, treated the infirm, and saved the invalid… And he did this far more often than he cared for anyone else, such as the rich & powerful or the politically connected to the two main parties of his day, the Saduccis and the Pharisees who were as corrupt and as evil as the Republicans and the Democrats are today…

Proof is in the pudding as always of course and that is why both the Pharisees and the Saduccis conspired together, in order to arrest, torture, and assassinate Jesus, in a monkey trial that they produced, staged and choreographed on the eying of the fateful Sabbath — a day of rest…

So in this story of Luke, it was not an exception that Jesus went to the aid of a poor and afflicted with deadly illness slave woman, at the invitation and behest of a Roman Centurion, who although was a wealthy and powerful man who sought his help — he was a foreigner and unclean as his Slave woman lover, or commonplace whore, was as well

And indeed it was this loving Jesus who went ahead and responded to that strange plea for mercy from a stranger — a Roman centurion who was at that moment stationed in Capernaum in what is today Israel, yet back then was the Jewish state of Palestine.

And because it was the Centurion who asked for the saving grace of Jesus “laying of the hands” upon his terribly ill slave lover hoping for a healing — this story is especially relevant today.

And it is a story of Faith above all else.

Because Faith is h is the true shibboleth.

It is the only qualifier to be a good Christian faithful person, and it does not distinguish between Jew, Greek or Gentile, nor is it distinguishing between rich, poor, slave or freedman.

And a Gentile Roman who asks for forgiveness for his Slave whore or his Lover owned woman, is not any less or any more important than any High priest and Rabbi at the temple of Solomon for Jesus.

That is the message here.

We all deserve Salvation and Faith and are promised the healing now and forever.

So now that Luke tells us how Jesus responded to the invitation by the Roman Centurion whose name is lost to history but whose fame remains eternal, it is Jesus that surprises by going to the assistance of an oppressor of the Jewish people.

And seeing as Jesus was prophetic enough and thus knew what would befall him at the hands of the Roman soldiers before long — it is far fetched even for Luke as the supreme story-teller and gospel writer who gave us a living, breathing and intimate account of the famous Physician, the magical healer and the great lover of all people, that Jesus Christ of Nazareth to glorify him as he truly was, and still is today, and will be so for evermore, bringing light into all of our tomorrows…

And although Luke is an awfully clear truth-teller, this is admittedly a difficult story to believe, because at the time, Capernaum was too small a city to even have a military garrison, let alone a Roman encampment that numbered in the hundreds of souls considering that the hundred Roman soldiers were assisted by many more hundreds of men of all classifications, such as armor bearers, blacksmiths, medicine men, doctors, iron workers, horse minders, aides de camp, slaves, whores, cooks, logistical support gage train attendants, camp followers, realties of the people attached to the force, wives & children, foragers, baggers, merchants, victualers and weapons makers.

And that constitutes a complete city on the move… that was in need of a healing that nobody could provide except the Great Healer Jesus of Nazareth.

This story is so unusual that we will not question how come that Capernaum at the time of the early pre-Jewish rebellion interstitial years, warranted a Centurion as a leader, as it is also unorthodox in our military history of the Jewish rebellions and the intervening years, because according to the Roman historical record, there were no Roman forces stationed in the territories of Herod Antipas.

So we have to accept it as an anomaly because at the time, although Herod Antipas had his own Jewish armed forces — he had recently lost most of his army in a failed conflict with his estranged former father-in-law, and that would have been enough reason for the Roman legions to be there and thus for the Centurion and his armed forces to be in Capernaum at the time…

You see Israel was always seating with trouble as it was awfully divided early on in its history, and the territorial troubles, disputes & divisions, had been simmering in that much maligned land, for thousands of years.

All the same, this is a fascinating story about the Christian generosity and the trust of faith that crosses and diminishes all the social, economic and political boundaries known to man.

Then this story is about the “slave.”

Who was that slave?

As we now know — she was indeed the beloved of the Roman Centurion.

So it is here that Jesus seeks to heal the officer’s lover.

And this is where Jesus oceans of compassion cross yet another major boundary … the firm wall of the “Caste system” of the time when the slaves where untouchables and this constituted a serious apartheid against them, so that since they were considered “unclean” — no self respecting Jew and especially a Rabbi, would ever deign to touch them.

Yet in this story of Luke, it is the message of Jesus who willingly went forth to heal the ‘Slave” right after he had finished his speech and announced within earshot of the people, that he would enter Capernaum to heal the “Salve” because the Roman Centurion (army leader) living there, had a slave whom he valued highly, and who was ill and close to death.

So, according to Luke, the story goes that when the Roman Centurion heard about Jesus speaking to the poor people near the City — the Centurion sent some of his friends who were indeed Jewish elders to Jesus, asking him to come and heal the slave woman.

And so when the elder Jews went to Jesus — they appealed to him in earnest to come and save the live of the slave by saying: “He is worthy of having you do this for him, for he loves our people, and it is he who built our synagogue for us.”

And thus Jesus bidder the people to guide him to the house of the Roman Centurion and he went with them… toward the city center.

Yet when he was not far from the house – the Centurion sent his friends to say to Jesus this: “Lord, do not trouble yourself, for I am not worthy to have you come under my roof; therefore I did not presume to come to you. But only speak the word, and let my servant be healed. For I also am a man set under authority, with soldiers under me; and I say to one, ‘Go,’ and he goes, and to another, ‘Come,’ and he comes, and to my slave, ‘Do this,’ and the slave does it.”

When Jesus heard these words — he was amazed at him, and turning to the crowd that followed him, said: “I tell you, not even in Israel have I found such faith.”

And indeed soon thereafter — when those who had been sent returned to the house, they found the slave in good health.

–Luke 7:1–10

Yours,

Dr Churchill

PS:

PPS:

If you want to help the Liberation of all of our People suffering from mental slavery today — please join up and contribute to the Lincoln party that still works on the Emancipation values of our great 16th president Abraham Lincoln.

And if this ugliest election on record the 2020 contest between dumb & dumber — moves you to join the Independents of America and even to volunteer to work with us for real change you can live with and to Emancipate all of our People once again — here is where you’ll find us:

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Categories

%d bloggers like this: