.

Mightier Than the Sword?  

His Eighties searing splash of fiery ink
Scorched the skin of those who won’t allow
The flare of feisty words. His weren’t in sync
With those of kowtow howls. He wouldn’t bow
To Ayatollahs raging overseas,
Forcing thought upon its buckled knees.

A fatwa didn’t stop his blazing words
From taking flight and burning through the skies
On unclipped wings. These bold linguistic birds
Trilled songs beyond the yell of hellish cries,
Defying threats from thugs who claimed that speech
For errant litterateurs was out of reach.

He dwelt in realms that lauded liberty.
He thrived in zones that prized the weight and worth
Of stories told with zeal—an endless spree
Of zesty words. But now there is a dearth
Of tolerance for terms that don’t comply
With “facts” oppressors get to verify.

And now this fearless voice of flair and fire
Has faced the unsheathed ire of dogged hate—
A savage stabbing. Freedom treads the wire
Twixt life and death… I pray it’s not too late
For all to see the shocking aftermath
Of wielding words that shun the tyrant’s path.

If words are met with brutal consequence;
If words provoke the penalty of death;
If words are deemed a criminal offense,
And speech is silenced—robbed of sound and breath;
Then Iran’s Ayatollah’s stance was right
And Salman Rushdie’s lost his lifelong fight.

.

.

Susan Jarvis Bryant has poetry published on Lighten Up Online, Snakeskin, Light, Sparks of Calliope, and Expansive Poetry Online. She also has poetry published in TRINACRIA, Beth Houston’s Extreme Formal Poems anthology, and in Openings (anthologies of poems by Open University Poets in the UK). Susan is the winner of the 2020 International SCP Poetry Competition, and has been nominated for the 2022 Pushcart Prize.


NOTE TO READERS: If you enjoyed this poem or other content, please consider making a donation to the Society of Classical Poets.

NOTE TO POETS: The Society considers this page, where your poetry resides, to be your residence as well, where you may invite family, friends, and others to visit. Feel free to treat this page as your home and remove anyone here who disrespects you. Simply send an email to mbryant@classicalpoets.org. Put “Remove Comment” in the subject line and list which comments you would like removed. The Society does not endorse any views expressed in individual poems or comments and reserves the right to remove any comments to maintain the decorum of this website and the integrity of the Society. Please see our Comments Policy here.


CODEC News:

49 Responses

    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Russel, thank you very much! I couldn’t help but write a poem. I saw the news headlines and thought this attempted slaughter was a much-needed warning to the Western world… we are already treading this reckless and ruinous path by silencing those who won’t dance to the tune of the malfeasant mockingbird media.

      Reply
  1. Mike Bryant

    Your poem is really about freedom of speech. Everyone knows it is illegal to shout “FIRE” in a theater, but writing a book or writing a poem obviously does not rise to that level.
    If the burning of an American flag is protected speech, if Christian symbols smeared with feces passes as art because of freedom of speech, if businesses may be burned to the ground and considered as peaceful protests, then writing a book or a poem is protected speech.
    If all speech is completely inoffensive, then why must it be protected? The only speech that must be protected is, obviously, offensive… even hateful speech.
    Our own CDC has just decreed that the vaxxed and the unvaxxed should be treated the same. Would we ever have heard them admit they were wrong if those who disagreed with the CDC had not been heard?
    We are not free yet. Freedom requires a robust exchange of thoughts in the marketplace of ideas. You, Susan, manage to highlight the inequities and iniquities of our time with beauty and truth.

    This lady knows freedom of speech… 1 min 19 sec

    https://video.foxnews.com/v/6310865990112

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Mike, you are right – “Freedom requires a robust exchange of thoughts in the marketplace of ideas.” Sadly, those marketplaces of ideas are getting fewer with each passing day. I believe people are worried about being shamed and cancelled if they speak freely… but, it’s the exact opposite. People will be shamed and cancelled PERMANENTLY if they don’t. Vast numbers of people speaking out; vast numbers of people standing up for what is right according to immutable truths and not fake fads; vast numbers of people who know and appreciate the significance of free speech is what is needed right now if we don’t want to wake up in the nightmare Salman Rushdie featured in yesterday. Thank you for all you do in the name liberty!

      Reply
  2. Joseph S. Salemi

    I might disagree with Rushdie about many things. But the fact that some dipshit little ayatollah can order Rushdie’s death for saying what he chooses is more than an intolerable affront to our liberty — it is a frightening portent of what is ahead for all of us.

    Do we have up-to-date “ayatollahs” here in the West, who can cancel us, doxx us, censor us, impoverish us, cheat us in elections, and send thugs to raid our homes?

    Susan is quite correct in her poem — this is not so much about Salman Rushdie, as about the shadow of totalitarian mind-control that is slowly settling on our world, and how many of our friends and neighbors think that it is the morally proper and virtuous thing to silence any dissenting voices.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Joe, thank you! You have got straight to the core of my poetic message and relayed it perfectly in a bold, clear comment that bears repeating. Any friends and neighbors thinking that it is the morally proper and virtuous thing to silence any dissenting voices should know exactly where that train of thought leads. I believe the “ayatollahs” are circling like vultures waiting for our culture to die… I hope with all my heart we resuscitate our fast-fading freedoms before it’s too late.

      Reply
  3. Roy E. Peterson

    Susan, the pen is still mightier than the sword. Though the wielder may be silenced or at least rendered unable, the words remain, and Rushdie is both a martyr and heroic writer figure. Whether he lives or not, he has had an important impact on others regardless of what oppressor verify or vilify. Like Joseph, those thugs in high places that believe they can silence us and raid our homes with impunity are extant. We must use our writing skills to nullify them.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Thank you very much, Roy. I agree with you – Salman Rushdie’s plight and the fact that he continued to write with a fatwa hanging over him has been an inspiration to many, I am certain.

      The fatwa was issued in 1989, a time when the British government was outraged by such a heinous threat to a citizen; at a time when safe houses and security were provided for Mr. Rushdie, at a time when a British citizen meant more than the feelings of an outraged ayatollah. Today the British government arrests its own citizens for “hate speech” – basically any speech that doesn’t align with the current ideology and it certainly doesn’t protect its own citizens against threats and dangers from cultures that threaten their own. I believe it’s a much scarier world for a writer when their own government is against them… but, it’s our duty to write; it’s our duty to speak up; it’s our duty to call out evil when we see it – survival of our waning freedoms depends upon it.

      Reply
  4. Joshua C. Frank

    Susan, great poem, and right on the money, as usual!

    The pen is still mightier than the sword and always will be; otherwise, why would the Ayatollahs have gone after Salman Rushdie in the first place? It is not without reason that Percy Bysshe Shelley said, “Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world.”

    As you mentioned in a comment on one of my poems, it could be responsible for a few more miracles in our increasingly barren world; this is not to boast, but to point out that Shelley was right. Governments throw people in prison, but we change minds and hearts. I agree with Roy that we need to use our writing skills to step up to this lofty position.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Thank you very much for this, Josh. I believe you are right – the pen really is mightier than the sword and I know that poetry has the power to change hearts and minds… I’m glad to say I’m speaking from personal experience. We are needed more than ever to “use our writing skills to step up to this lofty position”, which I will continue to do. My questioning title is for all those who have put their pens down and stopped speaking out; for all those who have caved in to cancel culture… we need to do exactly what Rushdie continued to do for 33 years after the fatwa was issued… keep speaking freely and fearlessly.

      Reply
  5. Paul Freeman

    Spot on. Our thoughts and prayers are with Sir Salman.

    This cowardly attack is similar in many ways to the attempt on the life of Nobel Prize winning author Najib Mahzouz in 1994, outside his home in Cairo, when he was in his eighties. His ‘crime’ was to write a book where the main characters’ lives mirrored those of various prophets.

    Thanks for highlighting the perils authors face for expressing themselves freely, Susan.

    Reply
  6. jd

    Great job as always, Susan. Feel bad for him just
    when he began to relax a bit after 30plus years.

    I’ll bet you could write a poem about Father Gordon
    MacRae too. He’s a Catholic Priest who is in his 28th
    year of being wrongfully imprisoned.
    https://beyondthesestonewalls.com

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      jd, thank you very much for your comment and your support. I look forward to reading about Father Gordon MacRae, and I will most certainly write a poem for him.

      Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      jd, I read Father MacRae’s story… how dreadful! Here is the poem I promised. I know it doesn’t do the story justice, but it’s from my heart. I am humbled by his attitude.

      Behind Stone Walls

      Behind stone walls there dwells a man who knows
      That humankind is blind to many ills.
      This man has felt the might of Satan’s blows.
      He fights the fight for truth injustice kills.
      Behind stone walls exists a man who strives
      To bring a spark of hope to darkest lives.

      Behind stone walls there kneels a man who prays
      For honesty and honor to prevail.
      He spends his gray, incarcerated days
      Blessing souls with words that rise from jail,
      On wings that bring the truth unto a land
      That craves the wonder of God’s guiding hand.

      This man is Father Gordon J. MacRae
      Serving time for crime that’s spun from lies.
      The devil locked him up and walked away,
      Yet still God’s light and love shine in his eyes.
      Behind stone walls is one whose heart is true.
      Beyond stone walls are those who know it too.

      Reply
  7. Brian Yapko

    Susan, this is a wonderfully-wrought and timely poem which puts me into a crisis of conscience. I love the poem and your defense of free speech. I also respect Rushdie as an icon of free speech. As a lawyer I have long been a strong and historically zealous advocate for first amendment free speech rights. That being said, even though I respect Rushdie, I despise his zealous brand of atheism (describing himself as a “hard-line atheist”) who is not only anti-religious (all religion, not just Islam “there is no god whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Hindu”) and who describes religion “as a medieval form of unreason” which deserves to be satirically mocked. I find his promotion of anti-religious satire to be unbelievably shallow. I find little to love in his literary mission and therefore find it very difficult to put him on a pedestal. That being said, the fatwa issued against him was despicable. No one has the right to silence his voice (even if I find it gross) let alone cause him bodily harm. As between him and the ayatollahs I have to take Rushdie’s side. Mike is quite right — it is the free speech that is offensive that most requires protection. But here’s the rub on free speech. He’s free to write and publish what he wants. I am free to despise it and to share the reasons for my dislike with whoever will listen. There’s a universe of difference between advocacy and censorship.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Brian, thank you very much for your comment. My poem isn’t so much “for” Salman Rushdie as “about” him. I thought the savage stabbing was symbolic of the silencing of those in our country who don’t toe the party line. Ironically, Rushdie was to have “a discussion of the United States as [an] asylum for writers and other artists in exile and as a home for freedom of creative expression.” … almost ridiculous when you think of the amount of cancelling going on right under our noses and his attempted slaughter.

      After hearing of the fatwa back in 1989, I purchased a copy of ‘The Satanic Verses’ so I could pore over the offending passages like a ghoul at the scene of an accident… only to find the book as boring as a telephone directory. It’s not the author’s stories I’m standing up for… it’s his right to tell them, as you correctly pointed out. I don’t like Richard Dawkins views, but I’m so glad he’s out there denouncing God’s creative skills and attributing them to aliens from another planet, because I’m sure he is unwittingly promoting the Bible with such idiocy. Diversity really is key in the marketplace of ideas… I believe it helps the majority of people draw their own sensible conclusions, especially when listening to those whose voices grate.

      Reply
    • Jack DesBois

      Brian, the more I hear about “The Satanic Verses,” the more I get the feeling that its promotion as Rushdie’s signature work is itself a form of subtle censorship. The only thing I have read of Rushdie’s is “Haroun and the Sea of Stories,” a delightful paean to storytelling and telling the truth, which as far as I can tell is filled with Christ, even if the author doesn’t know it.

      My thoughts and prayers go out to him for healing and strength. Thank you, Susan, for forging this formidable poem about a formidable wordsmith.

      Reply
      • Susan Jarvis Bryant

        Thank you for this, Jack. I haven’t read “Haroun and the Sea of Stories.” It sounds intriguing. The works I read had a strange, new age Arabian Nights feel I couldn’t quite connect with. I do believe, however, he is a “formidable wordsmith” who should never be silenced. I’m glad to hear he’s recovering.

  8. Sally Cook

    Susan, no doubt you remember Leo Yankevich, now gone, and his excellent work. A lot of lesser poets hated him, and for no good reason. After it had gone on for years, I asked him, Leo, what was your crime? His answer: “I was too good.”
    He may not have known of SCP, but I am so glad that you do. Here, I have not seen one person who does not appreciate your very considerable talents and the way in which you use them for good.
    SCP is your literary home, dear friend. And many thanks to Evan for giving us your excellent works.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Dearest Sally, I never had the pleasure of speaking to Leo, but I’ve read some of his powerful poetry and he had most certainly mastered the craft. I’m sorry to hear he had such a tough time. I am always thrilled when I see a meticulously crafted, breathtaking poem… it inspires me and gives me something to aspire to. That is what’s so great about the SCP… I’m inspired on a regular basis.

      It is beautiful of you to say that the SCP is my literary home. I’ve never thought of it that way, but you are absolutely right. I have read some marvelous poetry here and met some wonderful poets – poets who motivate me, stimulate me, and spur me on. Thank you, Evan, for having me. And thank you very much, my talented friend, for your support, advice, and your wonderful words… they mean the world.

      Reply
  9. Jeff Eardley

    Susan, absolutely well said. I am hoping that he will make a full recovery. I am just half way through, and thoroughly enjoying “Midnight’s Children” and cannot believe that a person of words can be attacked in such a savage way. It is so sad that the Chataqua meeting should end like this. Thank you for a most moving piece today.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Jeff, you are most welcome and thank you. I read “Midnight’s Children” some years back… I think it was a favourite on the English Literature syllabus in many British universities some time ago.

      What happened to Salman Rushdie is horrific, but sadly, I am not surprised that such an attack occurred. When people get arrested for re-posting memes on Facebook, when people serve time in prison for offending someone with a YouTube video or a tweet, when anyone can point the finger at anyone else with the accusation of being “caused anxiety” by words and have the author of those words dragged from their house in handcuffs… things start to go down a very dangerous path… a path that ends in real harm – physical harm. Let’s hope the Western world comes to its senses soon.

      I too hope Salman Rushdie makes a full recovery. Thanks again.

      Reply
  10. Joseph S. Salemi

    Let’s not forget the people murdered seven years ago at Charlie Hebdo in Paris, over something as minor as satirical cartoons.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Joe, I’ll never forget… it made my blood run cold. I am reading Andrew Breitbart’s ‘Righteous Indignation’ at the moment. It says everything about the dangerous position the MSM has put us in with their constant lies. Breitbart said:

      Walk toward the fire. Don’t worry about what they call you. All those things are said against you because they want to stop you in your tracks. But if you keep going, you’re sending a message to people who are rooting for you, who are agreeing with you. The message is that they can do it, too.

      I agree with him, but sadly Andrew Breitbart was stopped in his tracks. He died in suspicious circumstances in 2012. I believe telling the truth really is a revolutionary act.

      Reply
      • Joseph S. Salemi

        Yes, that was said by George Orwell, I believe. “In a world ruled by lies, telling the truth is a profoundly revolutionary act.”

  11. Mike Bryant

    Behind Stone Walls by Susan Jarvis Bryant

    Behind stone walls there dwells a man who knows
    That humankind is blind to many ills.
    This man has felt the might of Satan’s blows.
    He fights the fight for truth injustice kills.
    Behind stone walls exists a man who strives
    To bring a spark of hope to darkest lives.

    Behind stone walls there kneels a man who prays
    For honesty and honor to prevail.
    He spends his gray, incarcerated days
    Blessing souls with words that rise from jail,
    On wings that bring the truth unto a land
    That craves the wonder of God’s guiding hand.

    This man is Father Gordon J. MacRae
    Serving time for crime that’s spun from lies.
    The devil locked him up and walked away,
    Yet still God’s light and love shine in his eyes.
    Behind stone walls is one whose heart is true.
    Beyond stone walls are those who know it too.

    Reply
  12. Cynthia Erlandson

    So many great comments already — so I will just quote a couple of lines that I think are exquisitely poetic: “Forcing thought upon its buckled knees.” (wow!) “the shocking aftermath / Of wielding words that shun the tyrant’s path.” And I must say once more that I am amazed at the speed with which you come up with your poems!

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Cynthia, thank you very much indeed! I always appreciate your eye for fine detail.

      Reply
      • jd

        I am too, Susan, amazed at your prolificacy.
        Practice does make perfect apparently, at least
        for some. I thought you must have written the
        poem sometime in the past.

      • Susan Jarvis Bryant

        Thank you, jd. I followed your link and began to read… the poem came to me after taking in all the information. I am certain there are many who have been punished severely and unfairly who are now languishing behind stone walls. Father Gordon J. MacRae is a remarkable man. I am sure his words are changing many lives for the better. I know justice for Father MacRae will prevail… I hope it’s soon and I hope it’s here on earth.

  13. David Whippman

    Every decent person will echo your well-written views on this tragedy, Susan. For me, the irony is that many people who excuse the violence against those who offend Islam (or rather, some of its followers) would not think twice about mocking Christianity or Judaism.

    Reply
    • Joshua C. Frank

      It makes sense once you realize that the left has no coherent worldview except hatred of Christ, His followers, and everything we believe and value.

      Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      David, you are so right. If Salman Rushdie had written ‘The Satanic Verses’ now, I am sure he would have been imprisoned by his own government for “hate speech”. This must be a tricky story for the British press. Thank you very much for your astute comment.

      Reply
      • David Whippman

        You’re welcome Susan. I don’t know exactly how things are in the USA at the moment, but Britain was succinctly described as a country where everything now is policed – except real crime.

      • Susan Jarvis Bryant

        David, we’re hot on my homeland’s heels here in the US. The Government have just recruited a vast number of armed IRS agents (tax auditors) who must be ready to “use deadly force”. That sounds pretty darn scary to me. I believe we’re well on the road to serfdom. Who would have thought it… so soon after the Berlin Wall coming down? People have very short memories, or they don’t know their history. Let’s hope we turn back before it’s too late.

  14. David Watt

    The critical point is, as others have said, that you stand up for free speech. There aren’t enough people doing so today, and precious few with poetic flair.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      David, thank you and you are spot on – there aren’t enough people standing up for free speech. More fool them. “Don’t it always seem to go, that you don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone.” 😉

      Reply
  15. Joseph S. Salemi

    The whole point of censorship is not to prevent an individual person from saying unorthodox things. That’s only a subsidiary aim of the censors. The real purpose of all censors is to prevent the generality of persons from THINKING unorthodox things, and in consequence to censor themselves out of fear in the future. It is a means of establishing and preserving a public orthodoxy from which no one may openly dissent. In other words, going after one recalcitrant guy is just done “pour encourager les autres,” as the French army says when shooting a few deserters or cowards by lot.

    I have never liked Ayn Rand, and I reject her Objectivist viewpoints. But she wrote one very pertinent thing about the stifling nature of public orthodoxy, and how it develops:

    “The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by precedent, by implication, by erosion, by default, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other — until one day when they are suddenly declared to be the country’s official ideology.”

    Just a few weeks back, on one of the Catholic websites that I visit, someone commented on a thread that he didn’t understand why we were all enraged about persons being cancelled and censored by the left. He said that it was perfectly proper for Catholics to cancel and censor unorthodox thoughts, and there was absolutely nothing wrong with the practice on principle — it just depended on who did the cancelling, and what ideas were being cancelled.

    I shuddered. “Houston, we have a problem here…”

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Thank you, Joe. Yes, we have one heck of an horrific problem all over the Western world. Self-censorship is rife for all the reasons you have outlined. We are now living in the society Ayn Rand warned us against because we didn’t speak up and out. I am certain many thought they were doing the right thing and were fooled by the virtue signaling. I will admit to being fooled some time back. BUT, when the country’s “official ideology” lends itself to locking down citizens under false pretenses, mandating experimental shots, eradicating women, and sexualizing, brainwashing, drugging, and butchering our children, surely a line must be drawn. The line has been drawn for me. I would rather run my fat, offensive mouth off defending lives and freedoms than sit back silently. I have suffered financially and socially because I’ve spoken up, and it hurts… but nothing would hurt me more than witnessing pure evil and doing sod all about it… I couldn’t live with myself if I turned a blind eye.

      Evan, thank you for letting me get my forthright poetic word out. And thank you to all my wonderful fellow poets here at the SCP for inspiring me and supporting me in a world where many try to shame and ridicule me.

      Reply
    • Mike Bryant

      Joe and Susan, Yes, all those who self-censor are a huge problem. I maintain that the larger problem is the group of people who have gradually been convinced that the One Worlders have OUR interests at heart. Authoritarianism depends on these “useful idiots” to help them get a beachhead, a toehold, a meaningful presence and then control of organizations, institutions and, eventually, Machiavellian parties that use all means to take over a country. It is usually too late for these gullible individuals and institutions to realize what they have enabled. Of course, at that point they lose everything, including their lives. Those who would not bow went with dignity.

      A very worthwhile article by “Quote Investigator” about “useful idiots.”

      https://quoteinvestigator.com/2019/08/22/useful-idiot/

      Read it.

      Reply
    • Joshua C. Frank

      Just one question: if there is such a thing as right and wrong (as we know to be true), then why shouldn’t those who promote ideas that truly are in the wrong be held accountable for it? I’m not necessarily saying that guy in the Catholic group was right (I don’t have a definite answer either way), but I do think if we on the side of good had done a better job of cancelling those who promote evil (I don’t mean violence against them, I just mean things like banning their books and not giving them any air time), then we might not be in this mess in the first place. They got to where they are because they presented their evil ideas in attractive Trojan horses such as “liberty, equality, and fraternity,” and now Troy is all but leveled by fire and sword because we didn’t “beware of Greeks bearing gifts.”

      Reply
  16. Joseph S. Salemi

    Dear Joshua —

    People who spread wrong ideas are held accountable when you debate them and refute them and ridicule them. You don’t hold them “accountable” by shutting them up or burning their books or deplatforming them.

    You can’t ban people’s books and not give them air time here in the USA, because we have a First Amendment that prohibits such actions. That’s what our current fight against political correctness and cancel culture is all about. The liberal-left’s opinions on this subject are profoundly anti-American.

    You have to consider what is politically possible, and what isn’t. Freedom of speech and publication is ingrained in the American tradition, and saying that we should have been tougher in suppressing bad opinions and banning them and cancelling them simply won’t fly. Not here. Not ever.

    You want a Catholic “public orthodoxy”? So would I, ideally speaking. But it’s not going to happen in an America of multiple competing voices and opinions. Thinking that it ever will happen is quixotic. It would be wonderful if everybody, male and female, remained a virgin until marriage. But it isn’t going to happen, and it would be politically insane to try and enforce it by law.

    A public orthodoxy (one that would provide justification for acts of censorship) is simply NOT THERE. You might have had a Catholic public orthodoxy in the France of 1650, or the Italy of 1810, or even the Ireland of 1940. But you don’t have it now, anywhere.

    We have a very good chance of beating the left on the grounds of the First Amendment, freedom of speech, and sheer American individualism. Already there is a healthy groundswell of hate against the liberal-left and what it is trying to do. But when Catholics start orating about how we have to start remaking the nation in our image, and imposing our brand of censorship and cancellation on those who don’t want it, I throw up my hands in despair. Many traditionalist Catholics are living in a dream world of their own fantasy.

    By the way, the real reason that a Catholic public orthodoxy collapsed had nothing to do with our enemies, whom we always bested in argument, and whom we kept at bay for centuries. It collapsed because of that damned Vatican 2 “council,” which effectively short-circuited the entire engine of Catholic learning, scholarship, and theological certainty. There isn’t a thing said by one Catholic today that won’t be contradicted or debated by some dozen other Catholics elsewhere. You can’t establish a Catholic public orthodoxy as long as that sort of cacophony exists.

    Freedom of speech is for everybody, or it’s for nobody. Tertium non datur.

    Reply
    • Joshua C. Frank

      I see. That makes sense, though I’m not sure the Vatican II council is to blame (tempting as it is), given that Protestants in the West went in a similar direction at the time, but Catholics in Africa and Asia did not. But that’s a debate for another day…

      If I understand correctly, then what you’re saying is that it’s useless to desire a restoration of Christendom when such a thing is impossible given our current political situation, just as it would be foolish to desire America to be under the British crown again (all this is true), and our strategy instead should be promoting freedom of speech, just as liberals promoted tolerance, anti-authoritarianism, and diversity when they were in the minority in order to secure a better position for themselves, but threw all those away when they became the establishment. I hadn’t considered that, it’s something interesting to think about…

      Reply
      • Joseph S. Salemi

        Right on the mark, Joshua. The clamor for freedom of speech was always nothing but a tactical tool of liberalism, designed to give them leverage. Once they manage to secure control, it goes right out the window, as we see happening today.

        Important maxim in politics: “Inside every liberal there is a totalitarian itching to get out.” Just talk to any one of them for ten minutes and this will be confirmed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.