I’m pretty sure the reason people are so quick to bail is because they have been burned by politicians so often in the past that holding fast and trusting the long term plan is difficult. Toss in a side of continual bombardment of negative spin and propaganda and you get a recipe for defection.
As someone who has now been voting for 50 years and following politics for even longer, I think the first three of those can largely be traced back to overpromising. Every major office candidate does it, with Trump arguably being the worst offender I've seen. Much of the disillusion could be averted if presidential candidates, in particular, but also others, would speak in terms of goals rather than promises for this or that outcome.
It really wouldn't be hard to do, nor would it be any less effective in my view, if these people would just say, "I will try like hell to ..."
Trump made ridiculous promises about inflation and the Russo-Ukraine War. Those are the only ones that come to mind as I write, but if I needed to I could come up with a much longer list. And look at his brief sidekick, Musk, who said that "DOGE" would yield $2 trillion in budget savings. I just looked, and the claim is now $214 billion. Look, conservatives will praise the $214 billion and so might I, but he promised a $2 trillion elephant and has delivered 10% of that. Why SHOULDN'T we be pissed off?
God forbid that we should ever stand up and tell these people to cut the bullshit, but I wish that they could cut the bullshit. Everyone would be better off if they promised less than they deliver rather than the other way around.
Your points are excellent and Trump is delivering on all those things. He makes an announcement or a move daily. I don't think he sleeps and I'm concerned because he is looking tired lately.
Once you give up idealogical purity, where do you draw the line? Typically you end up where you don't want or need to be. Just look at what the Democrats have done to themselves. Look at what some so called churches have become. No, idealogical purity is a must.
You’d have to explain with topic you’re discussing. Remember, we had conservative ideological purity before Trump and that GOP said Trump would ruin the party. If you recall, that GOP couldn’t even win Ohio or Iowa or Florida.
As in my response above, I do not see ideology as a synonym for principles but rather rigid adherence to a system of ideas. That adherence pulls us away from God.
Ideology is idolatry because it puts ideas in place of faith to God. God has used all of history to show us that neither a human nor all humans combined are capable of separating ourselves from sin. That is why He counts faith as righteousness. That is why our deeds can never earn us a place in heaven. God rewards our faith (our internal relationship with God where we seek to do His will and the external relationships where we exhort our fellow believers to faith in God) with peaceful times (leaders who bring about good). The failure of the Democrats was not impurity but a lack of faith in God.
Ideology turns to idolatry when we rely on ourselves rather than God to accomplish it. Indeed we need ideology.....it helps define the direction and sustaining of a society. We cannot get away from this truth.
Isn't this is why God gave us the 10 Commandments? Our ideology is to have a government that upholds these Instructions and with policies, checks them against such instructions the way the Supreme Court evaluates cases against the Constitution and Bill of Rights. This is the foundation of the nation.
Our society's corruption of Self over Others coupled with lack of Self Responsibility has given us the current corrupt government. When we as a society repent, our idolatrous ideology will turn in the proper direction.....away from self and toward God.
I think your post confuses the word "ideology" with "principle," which causes me to disagree. God's principle is righteousness tempered with mercy. But I do not think ideology is desirable:
While I see your point that God created us with minds that can form plans and choose courses of action, the word ideology is defined as a "system of ideas and ideals, especially one that forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy." Rigid adherence to things like these – even good ideas and ideals – turns us into legalists and hypocrites. Look at the example of the Jews at the time of Jesus. They were totally devoted to God's laws. But they placed their love of God's law above their love of God. God isn't a set of principles, He is a person. He wants our faithful obedience to Him and not to the law – the knowledge of which brings about sin (e.g. Romans chapters 3 and 7 but esp. 7:7). He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. (2 Cor. 3:6). Inasmuch as ideology is adherence to the letter (to an inflexible idea or ideal rather than to God's Spirit), it is death.
I am stating that the Principles of the Almighty are the ideology of the matrix for our Constitution.
Through that paradigm did the founding generation via God's hand create our nation. In its core is there legality just as the 10 Commandments are a legality by which all will be judged at the end. It is also by that legality/standard/principle that one sees their own sin and realize they must ask God for help and cleansing from sin.
The nation's current ideology (even in some of the Church) is idolatrous because it is self-reliant, self-promoting, government dependant. etc. The current ideology is not the original as founded.
As the Founding Generation fully knew, they would not be able to overthrow the King's governmental control over them without the help of The Almighty One.
We also will not be able to overthrow this idolatrous ideology without fully repenting of this god of Self + Government reliance, asking The Almighty to grant us mercy , grace and strength to restore righteous government matrix as at our beginning.
Well I had to disagree with you sooner or later. You see a collapse. I see healthy internal dialogue about what to do next. It's the left that mindlessly walks in lockstep. We are having the discussions we need to have.
Perhaps DJT might hire you or "someone" to regularly remind everyone to think of the big picture - to remember one ball/strike, completed pass/interception, or missed shot/dunk doesn't make a game; rather all of us recognizing none individually are perfect, but together we "make a more perfect union."
Another great, timely Substack, Capt. Your positing we have a binary choice between Violent or Peaceful advocacy is accurate as well. Many see the dichotomy between the two so great as to verge on civil war. Another Substack column this very day asked are we approaching civil war. I believe we are already engaged in civil war since a majority of the Democrat party approves of violence and assassination as a response to people and politics with which they disagree. And since the Democrats, great and small, are afflicted with an increasingly unstable hive-mind of thought and action, any of us in opposition to the Democrats would do well to believe Democrats when they wish on us, their opponents, death and destruction. So, taking a war analogy as a given, how to address your advocacy of Peaceful Advocacy and your five pragmatic steps to advance Peaceful Advocacy in the face of warfare even if it’s a war, at this point, of ideas. You touch on intellectual purity, but discard it since it will impede pragmatic solutions. In that you are correct also since a true “big tent” in politics is much stronger if you can achieve it. In the words of the the great John J. Pershing, “I’d rather have them inside the tent pissing out, than outside pissing in”. Let’s leave the Democrats consume themselves with purity spirals , and, as you rightly observe, the GOP had tons of intellectual purity before Trump and couldn’t get elected dog-catcher boards. But there must be some Intellectual Purity or it’s guaranteed we’ll eventually slide into directionless transactional politics without coherent direction. So how to reconcile the two seemingly disparate approaches? I would draw a military analogy for planning a campaign. Proper planning requires having both Strategic and Tactical goals. The strategic addresses where to go, the tactical how do get there. So, we need discussion and agreement on the right about what are we? Conservatives? Republicans? Originalists? MAGA? If a Democrat asks today, “what are the Republicans, and why should I be one instead of hanging with my current fat nose-ring buddies?” , he’ll get five different answers from five different folk on the right. The Dems can list off 6 commie Democrat policy views right off the batt with remarkable fidelity across speakers. So, yes, we do need discussion and agreement on a Republican mission statement so to speak. Ae need a tactical mission plan as well. And we can’t wait months to have a ‘perfect’ battle space or strategy. We need to start now. Your policy areas are good places to start. So we can start tactically and not lose focus on the importance of the mission statement a bit further out!
Well said and great advice. You are a gift to our nation!!!
You’re way too kind Chris, but thank you!
Hello Seth. You are so welcome. The veracity of your insights speak for themselves.
Keep up the great work and may God bless and keep you.
Chris
I’m pretty sure the reason people are so quick to bail is because they have been burned by politicians so often in the past that holding fast and trusting the long term plan is difficult. Toss in a side of continual bombardment of negative spin and propaganda and you get a recipe for defection.
As someone who has now been voting for 50 years and following politics for even longer, I think the first three of those can largely be traced back to overpromising. Every major office candidate does it, with Trump arguably being the worst offender I've seen. Much of the disillusion could be averted if presidential candidates, in particular, but also others, would speak in terms of goals rather than promises for this or that outcome.
It really wouldn't be hard to do, nor would it be any less effective in my view, if these people would just say, "I will try like hell to ..."
Trump made ridiculous promises about inflation and the Russo-Ukraine War. Those are the only ones that come to mind as I write, but if I needed to I could come up with a much longer list. And look at his brief sidekick, Musk, who said that "DOGE" would yield $2 trillion in budget savings. I just looked, and the claim is now $214 billion. Look, conservatives will praise the $214 billion and so might I, but he promised a $2 trillion elephant and has delivered 10% of that. Why SHOULDN'T we be pissed off?
God forbid that we should ever stand up and tell these people to cut the bullshit, but I wish that they could cut the bullshit. Everyone would be better off if they promised less than they deliver rather than the other way around.
Your points are excellent and Trump is delivering on all those things. He makes an announcement or a move daily. I don't think he sleeps and I'm concerned because he is looking tired lately.
Once you give up idealogical purity, where do you draw the line? Typically you end up where you don't want or need to be. Just look at what the Democrats have done to themselves. Look at what some so called churches have become. No, idealogical purity is a must.
You’d have to explain with topic you’re discussing. Remember, we had conservative ideological purity before Trump and that GOP said Trump would ruin the party. If you recall, that GOP couldn’t even win Ohio or Iowa or Florida.
It's not one or the other. The American system was established to BOTH have definite principles AND to encourage compromise.
As in my response above, I do not see ideology as a synonym for principles but rather rigid adherence to a system of ideas. That adherence pulls us away from God.
Ideology is idolatry because it puts ideas in place of faith to God. God has used all of history to show us that neither a human nor all humans combined are capable of separating ourselves from sin. That is why He counts faith as righteousness. That is why our deeds can never earn us a place in heaven. God rewards our faith (our internal relationship with God where we seek to do His will and the external relationships where we exhort our fellow believers to faith in God) with peaceful times (leaders who bring about good). The failure of the Democrats was not impurity but a lack of faith in God.
Ideology turns to idolatry when we rely on ourselves rather than God to accomplish it. Indeed we need ideology.....it helps define the direction and sustaining of a society. We cannot get away from this truth.
Isn't this is why God gave us the 10 Commandments? Our ideology is to have a government that upholds these Instructions and with policies, checks them against such instructions the way the Supreme Court evaluates cases against the Constitution and Bill of Rights. This is the foundation of the nation.
Our society's corruption of Self over Others coupled with lack of Self Responsibility has given us the current corrupt government. When we as a society repent, our idolatrous ideology will turn in the proper direction.....away from self and toward God.
I think your post confuses the word "ideology" with "principle," which causes me to disagree. God's principle is righteousness tempered with mercy. But I do not think ideology is desirable:
While I see your point that God created us with minds that can form plans and choose courses of action, the word ideology is defined as a "system of ideas and ideals, especially one that forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy." Rigid adherence to things like these – even good ideas and ideals – turns us into legalists and hypocrites. Look at the example of the Jews at the time of Jesus. They were totally devoted to God's laws. But they placed their love of God's law above their love of God. God isn't a set of principles, He is a person. He wants our faithful obedience to Him and not to the law – the knowledge of which brings about sin (e.g. Romans chapters 3 and 7 but esp. 7:7). He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. (2 Cor. 3:6). Inasmuch as ideology is adherence to the letter (to an inflexible idea or ideal rather than to God's Spirit), it is death.
We agree on the definition of "Ideology."
Principle: a basic idea or rule that explains or controls how something happens or works. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/principle
I am stating that the Principles of the Almighty are the ideology of the matrix for our Constitution.
Through that paradigm did the founding generation via God's hand create our nation. In its core is there legality just as the 10 Commandments are a legality by which all will be judged at the end. It is also by that legality/standard/principle that one sees their own sin and realize they must ask God for help and cleansing from sin.
The nation's current ideology (even in some of the Church) is idolatrous because it is self-reliant, self-promoting, government dependant. etc. The current ideology is not the original as founded.
As the Founding Generation fully knew, they would not be able to overthrow the King's governmental control over them without the help of The Almighty One.
We also will not be able to overthrow this idolatrous ideology without fully repenting of this god of Self + Government reliance, asking The Almighty to grant us mercy , grace and strength to restore righteous government matrix as at our beginning.
Well I had to disagree with you sooner or later. You see a collapse. I see healthy internal dialogue about what to do next. It's the left that mindlessly walks in lockstep. We are having the discussions we need to have.
Well said/done Capt. K!
Perhaps DJT might hire you or "someone" to regularly remind everyone to think of the big picture - to remember one ball/strike, completed pass/interception, or missed shot/dunk doesn't make a game; rather all of us recognizing none individually are perfect, but together we "make a more perfect union."
Wise one you are, said Yoda.
Keep going, Captain K!!
Another great, timely Substack, Capt. Your positing we have a binary choice between Violent or Peaceful advocacy is accurate as well. Many see the dichotomy between the two so great as to verge on civil war. Another Substack column this very day asked are we approaching civil war. I believe we are already engaged in civil war since a majority of the Democrat party approves of violence and assassination as a response to people and politics with which they disagree. And since the Democrats, great and small, are afflicted with an increasingly unstable hive-mind of thought and action, any of us in opposition to the Democrats would do well to believe Democrats when they wish on us, their opponents, death and destruction. So, taking a war analogy as a given, how to address your advocacy of Peaceful Advocacy and your five pragmatic steps to advance Peaceful Advocacy in the face of warfare even if it’s a war, at this point, of ideas. You touch on intellectual purity, but discard it since it will impede pragmatic solutions. In that you are correct also since a true “big tent” in politics is much stronger if you can achieve it. In the words of the the great John J. Pershing, “I’d rather have them inside the tent pissing out, than outside pissing in”. Let’s leave the Democrats consume themselves with purity spirals , and, as you rightly observe, the GOP had tons of intellectual purity before Trump and couldn’t get elected dog-catcher boards. But there must be some Intellectual Purity or it’s guaranteed we’ll eventually slide into directionless transactional politics without coherent direction. So how to reconcile the two seemingly disparate approaches? I would draw a military analogy for planning a campaign. Proper planning requires having both Strategic and Tactical goals. The strategic addresses where to go, the tactical how do get there. So, we need discussion and agreement on the right about what are we? Conservatives? Republicans? Originalists? MAGA? If a Democrat asks today, “what are the Republicans, and why should I be one instead of hanging with my current fat nose-ring buddies?” , he’ll get five different answers from five different folk on the right. The Dems can list off 6 commie Democrat policy views right off the batt with remarkable fidelity across speakers. So, yes, we do need discussion and agreement on a Republican mission statement so to speak. Ae need a tactical mission plan as well. And we can’t wait months to have a ‘perfect’ battle space or strategy. We need to start now. Your policy areas are good places to start. So we can start tactically and not lose focus on the importance of the mission statement a bit further out!
President 47 nailed it w