The West is sociologically suffering as a result of the failure of at least three parties of people who had the responsibility to maintain the moral standards upon which Western civilization was established. Bible-based principles established and grew the West. But in the last half century those Bible-based principles that built the West have been eroded away by a new generation of agnostics and atheists who consider the Bible to be a book of religious fables. We would say that the present sociological chaos of Western civilizations reveals the failure of past generations to continue the Bible-based moral principles that built the West. But the past generations failed the present and future generations in at least three areas:
- The parents failed to teach their children the commandments of God.
They failed to do what God commanded Moses in order to preserve the Israelite society until the coming of the Messiah: “And you will teach them diligently [the commandments of the Lord] to your children and will talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you lie down and when you rise up” (Dt 6:7). The civilization of Israel forsook these instructions, and thus the people eventually gave up a knowledge of the God who brought them out of Egyptian captivity (Hs 4:6; Rm 1:18-32).
Because we have copies of Bibles today that contain the history of Israel’s fall from God, we know that throughout their history the Israelite parents utterly failed to teach the commandments of God to succeeding generations. Western parents have done likewise. Western parents have utterly failed in this parental responsibility in order to continue a cultural stability that is based on faith in God. They have failed because they themselves as parents have long forgotten the commandments. In their own minds, God became an optional mental imagination who was subservient to their own desires. The unfortunate result is that their children, who are now on the streets without Bibles in their hands, have rebelled against the moral standards of the Bible.
In past generations, the grandparents of the present generation walked the streets with Bibles in hand in search of those who would study the Bible with them. But the present generation would mock those grandparents who would walk the streets with Bibles in their hands. The present generation is out there burning down the livelihood of those whom they believe represent the “oppression” of the past.
The parents of the present younger generation who are on the streets could not teach to their children what they themselves did not know. We must remember that societies build up to a sociological paradigm shift over generations. In reference to apostasy from a heritage of faith, each generation of parents fail in some way to continue the legacy of their own parents. As an example of this, the generation that is now passing away assigned the teaching of the Bible to religious professionals. Contrary to the personal responsibility of what was mandated to the parents of the sons and daughters that was enjoined on the parents of Israel, professional preachers and teachers and youth leaders were hired to do the job of the parents to teach their children in the home. The responsibility of the parents was consigned to those who were outside the home. Parents saw themselves as only bus drivers whose sole responsibility it was to get their children to the Bible class or youth activity.
However, a godless generation does not result from the failures of the immediate parents of that generation. Sociological apostasy usually takes place over more than one generation. When Paul spoke of a people who give up a knowledge of God (Rm 1:18-32), we must conclude that over several generations a civilization of parents became themselves delinquent in their responsibility to personally study and teach their children the word of God. This is the conclusion that we derive from the moral state of affairs that eventually came to fruition in the generation in which Noah lived (See Gn 6:5).
- The educators of the West failed to pass on to their students respect for the moral authority of God.
Though some parents may have instilled in their children the fear of the God of creation, when the children went away to secular universities, the professors of those secular systems of education bombarded the minds of the children with an alternative to creation. Atheistic evolution become the new “god” for the existence of all things. Young university students who first believed in the God of creation were intimidated into casting off that God who had revealed moral standards by which civilizations are preserved. The new god of science was introduced into the minds of innocent young people, and thus the moral standards of the Bible carried little weight in determining the behavior of the citizens. And since the economic inequity of the Western world has been supposedly attributed to a God who would allowed such, it was easy for the new generation of the West to cast off that God in order that they create a new god by which they are allowed to determine their own moral standards.
It is for this reason that all Christians must be very alert whenever there is a sociological paradigm shift taking place in their country. These shifts are not God-oriented, and thus, what usually comes out on the back side of the revolution is a more atheistic society. Cultural revolutions are not generated by God-fearing people. They are generated by the masses who seek some earthly solution for their earthly problems.
Add to the preceding the socialistic Marxist ideology of the educators of Western universities. Not only have these educators forsaken belief in God, they have taught an entire generation that Marxist socialism will answer all the problems the present younger generation is facing. This generation of graduates, therefore, have been led to believe that university tuition debts will be cancelled and everyone will have a job. Society will supposedly enjoy financial equity when economic structures of the past are broken down.
What has happened to this generation of Western youth is similar to what Hitler accomplished with the youth of the generation of Germany in the 1930s. He knew that if he would direct the people to a future Nazi Germany, he had to turn the loyalty of the youth to the ideology of Marxist socialism. For example, in his efforts to “bred” a new generation of Aryan Germans, he established youth camps throughout Germany. During the youth camp sessions, young boys and girls were encouraged to adopt Hitler as their new “father,” and thus “bred” in order to produce his new Aryan generation of Germans. In one camp, for example, out of the thirty-six young teenage girls who attended, thirty-five fell pregnant before they returned home. Stunned parents tried to regain the respect of their children, but it was too late. The younger generation turned against their parents in order to “pay homage” to their new father, Adolf Hitler. It was only a few years later that Hitler used this new generation of Aryans to launch war across Europe.
- In order to produce a society that is a cult in reference to their new heroes, those who join the cult must be willing to give up everything, including their minds, and those closest to them.
The supreme leader of the cult (state) must be given total loyalty. Therefore, in order to receive total loyalty, the subservient must be separated from those with whom they are the closest. The younger generation must disengage from the generation of their parents.
In Western civilizations, there is a paradigm shift of loyalty from honoring and respecting those who would enjoin divine moral standards on the people, to those who are the celebrities of society. Since the celebrities present to the public a sense of success, then a narcissistic generation is easily persuaded to switch loyalties.
In the case of Hitler, Stalin and Kim Jong-un, worship of the demigod must be encouraged at all cost. Children are no longer allowed to be innocent, but must give total allegiance to the new moral order. In order for any cultic social order to come to fruition, the new moral order must attack the traditional moral values of the past. It is no longer a crime, therefore, to loot and burn that which represents the economic establishment of the past. Doing such within a society is justified by the those who seek to implement a new moral paradigm. It is assumed that the strength of the movement of the people determines what is right for the people.
We must not forget that healthy societies do not seek to destroy their history. Our history identifies who we are in the present. Tearing down statutes or burning books that represent our history, therefore, are efforts to deny who we are. If we tear down that which defines who we are in the present, then we are destroying. In fact, we will become an insecure society with a dubious future. If we lose our identity, we will end up as cultureless zombies who have no idea where we are going.
Since mobs are the minions of extremists, the mob will always seek to cram their ideology down the throats of others. The mob’s rejection of the past, by tearing down statutes and burning books, is always a diversion from the problems the people actually seek to correct in the present. We simply must not forget that extremists are never satisfied. The more they get their way, the more they want. There are never enough statues to tear down, historic movies to censure, or books to burn. If they receive no push back for desecrating the past, they will simply push right over those with whom they disagree.
After Hitler had energized the youth, the German Student Union initiated during the 1930s the burning of all books that promoted ideologies that were contrary to Nazism. Books by Jewish authors, books by pacifists, or religious leaders and anarchist were burned across Germany. It was a literary purging by fire in order to restructure the education of the new Aryan society of Germany.
As with the Bolshevik revolution of Russia in 1917, the radical left Marxist/Leninist movement destroyed (burned) the ruling class (the privileged) in order to spark the Russian Revolution of the people. Hitler eventually did what we now witness among many of the rioters who have swarmed across the West. He authorized his Nazi Party to loot all that the Jews possessed. He mandated boycotts of Jewish businesses. Social revolutions often become mobs, and mobs always seek to burn the past in order to go into their future. Unfortunately, if a movement becomes a mob, then all discussions are concluded with those who would represent another point of view.
Such is not uncommon in the West as instigators of “marches” are financially supported by a coalition of financiers who feign to be supporters of the people. While they disguise their motives by feigning support of those who loot and burn, they seek to establish a new economic state wherein they can gain control through the power of their money. But in order to do this, the old economic order must be destroyed.
In a democratic market economy, the sponsorship of any movement must follow the majority of the people. Once the people are moving in the direction where the demigods can take control of the movement, then as the number of voters grow in their favor, the existing remnants of the past civilization are doomed to follow the majority. This was exactly how Lenin hijacked the Russian Revolution. Once the Bolsheviks (the people) rose up to dispel the Russian civilization that was historically controlled by the Czars, he then rose up as the elected leader of the movement.
During these times of socialistic transition, the socialistic news media is often on the payroll of the new economic elite. The news media must be on the side of their financial supporters in order to continue their business as a news media. Once the sociological paradigm has shifted, then the news media must become the media of the state, or it is banned by the state. It is at this time in a sociological paradigm shift that a tipping point has been reached. There is no turning back to the past.
In the Western scenario, those who are thirsting to take control are publicized by a socialistic news media that has generally adopted or condoned a far left neo-Marxist movement. At the same time, the conservative news media wane in this sociological paradigm shift because they begin to lose the financial backing of the people. As the customers of the products of the corporate left are bought by the majority left, corporate sponsors withdraw from the conservatives. As the majority becomes stronger in buying the products of the corporate left, then the money moves to the news media that supports the left. Conservatives consequently lose their voice. A remnant of conservatives will remain in the civilization, but the new order is established and continued by the new moral paradigm of socialistic atheists.
The West is presently going through a moral paradigm shift. The protestors are now the new Bolsheviks of Russia who initially generated an economic paradigm shift in the early twentieth century. The new Bolsheviks of the West in this century are in a cultural revolution to discard the norms of the forefathers in order to establish a new moral order. Because of the weak leadership of the present Western leaders, a new cultural revolution is emerging out of the present social chaos. This cultural revolution will not subside simply because the present leadership of the West has no moral stamina to push back against the tremendous sociological forces that are encouraging social and political change. It is now as the aged US Senator John Kennedy of the state of Louisiana said to his fellow political leaders, “Leadership needs to grow some guts.”
For the sake of votes in the present Western democratic environment, weak political leaders have bowed down to the threats of the neo-Marxists who seek to rebel against the “privileged” in order to establish an atheistic socialistic society. Unfortunately, the new Marxist is usually ignorant of history in reference to socialistic societies. He does not realize that socialistic societies throughout history have always come to a dismal economic end. We are not without an example of this in the present with the country of Venezuela. But socialists are rarely students of history. They usually cannot think beyond the next block on their march down city streets. They are usually narcissistically concerned only with things that affect them in the present. They are blinded to the new sociological paradigm to which they are condemning their children.
However, in the beginning of the movement, the idealistic socialist believes in the fictitious ideal that if all the wealth would be equally distributed, then we all would live in financial equality. But the new equality, as was proved by Russian communism, and presently in Venezuela, means that we will all live in poverty. Therefore, the sociological paradigm shift from a market economy wherein some are poor, is transitioned to an economy wherein everyone is poor, save for the few elite who control the newly established economic paradigm. Nevertheless, the new Bolsheviks are determined to mount their threats against the present gutless leadership of the West, as long as weak leaders do not push back, which they have no desire to do because of the votes. They, too, must move in the direction of their financial supporters.
As stated before, when a sociological paradigm makes its shift in a civilization, so also must the leadership of that civilization. And if the present sociological shift gives up a knowledge of God, then also will the leaders of the new paradigm. The leadership must conform to the ideology of the new paradigm in order to be voted into office. Otherwise, a dictator must rise up and hijack the revolution, and take control of the people.