Albert Mohler suggests that his news commentary is guided by
a Christian Worldview. Every day he sets out to highlight a few stories he
believes are pertinent and offer observations which will help his audience gain
a more Biblical perspective on news and current events.
The Cold War was in many ways a comfortable time for
Christian Conservatives. The world was pretty simple. Everything was (to them)
black and white, good and evil. And of course the United States was the nation
on God's side fighting the evil empire.
Christian conservatives were not alone in embracing this
narrative. Most Americans embraced this in some form and the media and
educational system did all it could to steer their eyes away from the truth.
The American system made it citizens fat and happy but at a
great price. Around the rest of the world, proxy wars were fought, dictators
supported and many social cancers were developed during that time in order to
support the American model. In the name of Capitalism some of the social
bedrocks (such as local economics) were subverted and the public was taught to
embrace an economic and social model which basically promoted militarism.
Our society today is rooted in retail consumerism and the
financial industry, but we still have one strong manufacturing sector. And that
would be arms. The United States is the world leader in manufacturing and exporting
armaments and this economy is closely wedded to its foreign policy. The arms
themselves are but tools in the larger geo-political arsenal.
In hindsight many have seen the Cold War as something of a
farce, a cruel and unnecessary trick that empowered and enriched many people and
led to unwarranted suffering and destruction in the process. But others
unwilling to question the Establishment and the philosophical outlook which has
shaped their lives have been left floundering. The supposed victory of 1989-91
has left some wondering what to do next.
Power players will even admit this and grant that in a
unipolar world the United States (or any empire) needs enemies. Tensions are
healthy for those who seek power and wish to profit from it. In the 1990's,
Somalia and the Serbs didn't really do the trick. Al Qaeda filled in for about
a decade but is waning in its grip of fear on the public. But these are small
tension-models. George Bush tried to turn the war on Al Qaeda into something
global. The war has really been on the American people and has provided a
blueprint for the militarization of society.
A larger macro-model is needed and not a few policy planners
and commentators have been pushing for what will in effect be a new Cold War.
The need for tension has shifted attention and policy toward
China but some have found a much more familiar and perhaps convenient venue.
The new villain is Vladimir Putin of Russia.
While certainly not a wholesome character, he has for many
Russians been the leader they were looking for. Of course I would suggest that
no world leaders are wholesome or moral but that's a point most Americans would
reject. Many citizens of this country venerate their presidents even though
they have a long track record of moral ambiguity, hypocrisy and worse.
In fact I would be part of the camp that would view the American
presidency as a study in evil. I cannot think of a single one that I would
regard in any way as being some sort of model of leadership or moral standing.
Some are certainly worse than others, but the notion of a 'good' president let
alone a 'great' president is something (I would argue) completely alien to a
Biblically shaped worldview.
A few lone voices mostly outside the United States decried
American policy in the 1990's, especially as it was directed toward Russia. A
few more brave voices decried America's policies during the Cold War. These
policies which must be described as Imperial have not changed. In fact they
have only grown worse over the past decade.
Putin's actions must be seen in light of American actions
during the 1990's. Many thinkers (even those with chips in the game) do not
accept the American narrative concerning Reagan and the end of the Cold War.
Rather the Russian system imploded, and while it was trying to regain its feet
the Americans did everything they could to destroy them.
At that point it was not the Soviets they were kicking, but
the Russian people.
The United States collaborated in the destruction of the Russian
economy, and geopolitically sought to destroy Russia's traditional spheres of
operation. The United States did all it could to reduce Russia to being a Third
World nation. This was not mere revenge or a victory dance. This was a process
in setting the United States up as a global power and a force at work within
the continent of Asia.
Many Americans have felt right at home learning to hate the
Russians anew. Putin is cast as a dictator. This charge is levied by people who
know nothing of Russia's history or political situation, let alone its recent
troubles under Yeltsin.
Russia is excoriated and cast as an aggressor simply because
it won't let the United States do what it wants to do. America has been using
its various tools (NATO, the EU, the UN, Multinational Capitalism etc...) to
box Russia in and completely eliminate its ability to function.
It is not Russia that is the aggressor, but the United
States.
Russia is cursed for supporting the Assad regime in Syria
when the average American commentator is unable to explain both the demographic
and political issues within Syria, Russia's interest in the conflict, nor
American action within the region. The problems are deeper than simply
declaring here's a bad dictatorship and bad Putin supports them.
The public is in even greater ignorance and completely
subjugated to the media narrative. It's unfortunate but in this grouping I
would also include the Christian Commentators of the Establishment. They have
repeatedly demonstrated their adherence to the same general framework in their
conflation of the interests of the American Church with American Patriotism and
Military expansion. In fact the American Church is often worse and more
aggressive.
The only reason there has been some hesitation with regard
to Syria is because the president is Barack Obama. Some are war weary and a bit
sceptical after the debacle in Iraq and all the lies that went with it. But I
am confident and have no doubts that if George Bush was the president and
wanted to go into Syria he would be solidly supported by the American Church.
CONTINUE READING PART 2
CONTINUE READING PART 2