Have faith. God will swallow Chulthu.

I’m a bit worried for Brother Donald. He’s trying to be faithful in the UMC, when the church is going heretical really quickly. Dalrock did call him out for tolerating female led leadership within his church.

On this, Donald has but one choice: leave the UMC. For they are rigorous in their enforcement of church discipline when it suits them. I can understand his problems: he’s in a denomination that historically is faithful, evangelical (though not reformed enough for my tastes) and he loves his people and his congregation. As he ought, as is his duty.

Even though his denomination is following the path of the liberals. The reformed abandoned the mainline Presbyterians in the 1930s when they began to tolerate liberal theology and excommunicated those who protested too much, and without attending to the rigor that close adherence to scripture brings, the church is dissolving into the Kiwanis with candles, and thus falling over.

The PCUSA is shrinking over 5% per year and will cease to exist, if present trends continue, in my lifetime. Meanwhile, its leadership quoth:

“The PC(USA) is a church made up of vibrant congregations doing their best to live out the gospel of Jesus Christ in their communities and in the world,” an apparently unfazed Gradye Parsons, Stated Clerk of the General Assembly of the PCUSA, soothed. “Membership declines continue, but on a whole the denomination is settling into the new thing God is creating.”

We should cheer this decline, but at the same time exhort young men to get out of apostate church institutions and seek fellowship with men who want to follow the scriptures. (Don’t worry – the women always follow.)

This is a difficult thing for some. Not as much for money. But for love. I’m quite aware the PCANZ — the Kiwi Presbyterians — went right to the brink of liberal suicide, and then stepped back. There is still a liberal wing there. Yet… I worship with them. Because I love my congregation, and to leave them would require a marked deviation from the faithfulness to what we have been taught, which the Presbyterians here still have. There are more reformed congregations locally — one that meets at a time which allows this person who is morning challenged to wake up first — and if my church goes apostate, out of it I will go. But not yet.

Besides, schism is bad.

At this point the conversation at Dalrocks deteriorated into a standard argument: that feminism was a consequence of the Prots. And the answer to that is no, and yes. The No is that the doctrine of the church clung to the teaching of Paul.

The yes is that the abolitionists and feminists were the same people, and many late Victorians fell into the holiness error, including avoiding what is legal (alcohol) while denying the plain teaching in scripture about the place of women.

First-wave feminism was basically invented by mainline Protestantism.

No, it was invented by Communist infiltrators sponsored by the Soviet Union. Read the Venona decrypts. See how the Commies consolidated power in Russia; it’s the same pattern as American feminism. Mainline Protestantism fell first because Commies prefer corrupting large institutions to convincing people (especially Cold War Americans) that their beliefs are valid and beneficial.

The Protestants’ problems today are not the result of Protestantism. Observe how Protestant principles like sola scriptura and priesthood of the believer are rejected wholesale by these blasphemers. They refuse to teach what the Bible says, refuse to hear the voices of the men in their congregations and refuse to serve as the conscience of America.

“If men in leadership had been brave enough 100 years ago to stand against it, we wouldn’t be dealing with it now.”

Protestants fell first because we were attacked first. The Communists have spared your sect because your isolationism and pacifism make you a low-priority target. You are no threat to Evil. Do not be proud of that.

Cthulhu will eat you last.

John, who is a Mennonite, and knows that church history, gives a correction: the Bolsheviks killed the Russian Mennonites, as with the Old (Orthodox) Beleivers, in job lots, for their way of live is not compatible with the Soviet.

And the Soviet is now one with Sodom and Tyre.

That’s why I said “mainline Protestant”, not Protestantism itself. I’m Protestant. I am at the point where I consider mainline Protestant a heretical sect – given that most of them don’t believe in the divinity of Christ or that Jesus it the only way to salvation, I think all of us can be in agreement there.

Protestants fell first because we were attacked first. The Communists have spared your sect because your isolationism and pacifism make you a low-priority target.

Russian Mennonites flourished in the 19th century after Catherine the Great’s invitation to them. The Bolshevists then slaughtered them en masse in the 20th century. The lucky ones managed to escape to the U.S., Canada, Mexico, and various places in Central and South America.

Most of them died.

A few of them abandoned their long-held position of nonresistance and tried to fight back. They lost. They all died. The Bolshevists were too strong.

“When they persecute you in one city, flee to the next.”

You are no threat to Evil. Do not be proud of that.

I think a community of faithful followers of Jesus is a huge threat to evil. Isn’t that what Jesus basically told us to do?

Cthulhu will eat you last.

My Bible reads “The gates of hell will not prevail against the church”. I am confident that those of us who continue to obey the scriptures faithfully, even unto death, will survive as a remnant in the world until our Lord’s return.

John is correct. God is active. God intervenes. Chuluthu may always swim left, but he is not the last enemy: death is. And God will swallow up both in his final victory.

So have faith. The nations may rage, but they do so for they know they have but a short season of influence. Look at the eternal.

Trolls feed the Honey Badgers.

I think the first rule of law is only fight when you can afford to. Have your people supplied. The second rule is not to attack where people are strongest. The left ignore both, and fail.


Nerds have bulldozed Hollywood’s monopoly on culture, and rendered it all but completely dependent on them for what little revenue stream their fetish for innovation and efficiency will allow Hollywood’s outmoded business models.

And it’s not just Hollywood. Academia has come under assault, too, with some of the most powerful voices for reform of higher education coming from the tech sector. California venture capitalist Peter Thiel has been probably the most outspoken assailant of academia, and has even taken to literally paying promising STEM students not to attend college and instead giving them money to get into business. Unless you’re an elite school with a well-established and deep pocketed alumni network, or a tech school, or both (as in the case of MIT), this is going to cut into your capacity to attract alumni who might actually make money.

Furthermore, the crisis of student debt has cast serious doubt as to whether the modern university, with its endless studies departments, safe spaces, and speech codes, can provide any actual value to students in exchange for its exorbitant tuition rates. Add in the fact that STEM-oriented gadflies are some of the most vocal and successful critics of squishy postmodernism in the humanities, and you can see where traditional academe would be threatened by the rise of that group’s status. Most tech workers and STEM people still have college degrees, of course, but that probably produces even more resentment among their classmates hawking Pumpkin Spice lattes at Starbucks.

In short, the rise of Silicon Valley, geek chic and focus on STEM has seen an attendant decline in status and economic viability for America’s most inefficient, politically correct, conventionally Left-wing sectors. The hipsters are dead; long live the nerds.

The sense of outrage and the use of a murderous bastard is typical of the hipster.
The sense of outrage and the use of a muderous bastard is typical of the hipster.

How did this happen? The answer is long and complicated, but to put it simply, no person with a knowledge of political history should ever bet against the nerds. For all the sneers of the New York Times and their fashionable partners in the media elite about the “hyper-whiteness” of the nerd identity, the fact is that those forged in the crucible of anti-intellectual injustice simply will not break. Alex Jones is wrong about almost everything, but he is right to label nerds “the most dangerous people in this country, because they end up running things.” And indeed, today more than ever, to be an intelligent, creative, free-thinker is to be the type of person who ends up on top of the heap.

The latter-day Carrie Nations opposing them should have seen this coming. When comic books were first labeled dangerous, nerds spearheaded their rush to acceptance and broke the censors. When role-playing games were vilified by histrionic, uneducated mothers looking for scapegoats to cover their own lack of parenting, it was nerds who blew the whistle on their ignorance and fraud. The United States was founded by its most highly educated, and the same class built the progressive era in the early 20th century before undoing it in the 80’s through finance, and then ushering in the information age through computers. They put a man on the moon, Silicon Valley on the map, and the world on the internet. You have to get up very early to put one over on an intellectual elite, and it’s dubious whether those who have tried to do so this time ever stop hiding from imaginary triggers in their beds. Small wonder they are losing so badly.

It is not just America where this is happening. Globally, the left is in retreat. David Cameron has crushed the lisping avatar of contentless teenage angst known as Ed Miliband, while Benjamin Netanyahu has frozen out his enemies with the cold reality of geopolitics. Soon, the only place that is left (in both senses) will be your average college campus, and it won’t be long before men like Peter Thiel snatch all their prospectively wealthy students away to innovate, leaving only the army of baristas and mental hypochondriacs that populate the various “Studies” departments. And the more the media caters to them, the more irrelevant it will be.

And the tears flow, because the hipsters, the SJW, know not how things work, and want to control that which they do not understand.


So far the activists have gelded and made irrelevant the world council of churches, most political parties, most publishers, almost all TV, and most of hollywood. They have almost destroyed comics. They are losing with science fiction and gaming. And… when they try to regulate the internet one corporation at a time the conversation just shifts to another platform. They add not to the signal. They are just seen as noise, and they will pass.

But truth will get through.

Anti offence rules are hate speech.

This is going to be very short. My thesis is that the tendency to try to tiptoe around the sensitivities of people will not work.

It will not work because there are systems of theology and philosophy that are antithetical to each other, and Hegel got it wrong. There is no synthesis: there is just antithesis.

Consider the following.

Orthodox Serb: “There is but one way to be saved, and that is through Jesus, who is God incarnate and his church, which is empowered by the Holy Spirit”
Igor the Bosniak: “Allah is the only God, and his prophet is Mohammet, and your Jesus is but a prophet that points to him

“Academic freedom is declining. The belief that free speech rights don’t include the right to speak offensively is now firmly entrenched on campuses and enforced by repressive speech or harassment codes. Campus censors don’t generally riot in response to presumptively offensive speech, but they do steal newspapers containing articles they don’t like, vandalize displays they find offensive, and disrupt speeches they’d rather not hear. They insist that hate speech isn’t free speech and that people who indulge in it should be punished. No one should be surprised when a professor at an elite university calls for the arrest of ‘Sam Bacile’ [who made the YouTube video The Innocence of Muslims] while simultaneously claiming to value the First Amendment.”

On today’s campuses, left-leaning administrators, professors, and students are working overtime in their campaign of silencing dissent, and their unofficial tactics of ostracizing, smearing, and humiliation are highly effective. But what is even more chilling—and more far reaching—is the official power they abuse to ensure the silencing of views they don’t like. They’ve invented a labyrinth of anti-free speech tools that include “speech codes,” “free speech zones,” censorship, investigations by campus “diversity and tolerance offices,” and denial of due process. They craft “anti-harassment policies” and “anti-violence policies” that are speech codes in disguise.

What the petunias (which will soon be counted as a hate crime word) forget is that these disagreements are not a matter of politeness, but of faith, salvation, blood and fire. The Islamist considers that his religion spreads by war, and conquering infidels is a duty, or he does not take his faith seriously. The Christian believes the gospel should be preached to all people or the commands of his saviour he ignores.

And to say that we will mature out of this into some kind of anodyne politeness, with the form or religion, is to deny the power of religion. It is to hate those with faith. (Which to the leftist, is, of course, acceptable).

Let there be freedom of speech. It is far better to argue with words than bullets. And we are not children nor should we be childlike: our faith we should be able to defend.

Finally, to both the Leftist and the Islamist I say this: brothers and sisters, your sins will bear witness against you and damn you unless you turn to the cross. There is but one way to salvation, and that is through Christ. Leave the path you are following. Do not consider this crimethink.

Change, and follow Christ

In love with easeful death.

The modern state considers the removal of its existence, and reducing the land to waste: to some fantasy where humanity have left but noble ruins, as a good thing. For they know that they cannot continue as they are.

When you have the dynamic — of continually subsidizing the official victims — continuing (and I write this at a time when the Tories in NZ have just increased the dole for the poor, despite being in deficit), then you are setting up a Ponzi scheme that will fail.

Evemtually. And this is a feature, not a bug.

The current Progressive State cannot possibly endure because it totally demotivates the productive classes who the State needs to keep paying for its own perpetuation. But it is clear from Greece and Venezuela that the Progressive State will take everything and everyone down with them rather than admit they were wrong. I don’t know what that spells for the next 10-20 years in what was formerly a free republic. But it took 70 years for the USSR to collapse. Although I always maintain that the Soviet Communist Party did not “collapse” – it just moved to the US.

It is not enough to subsidize the feckless. We must, in this rush to destruction, remove all sense of traditon and fairness. Because equality. Even if this cripples us.

I would suggest that, instead, many of those people who are well-paid and intelligent aren’t really all that motivated or dedicated to keeping the show going, when the show pays out less and less, and expects more and more bizarre behavior and prolific expressions of belief from the people dedicated to upholding it.

The focus should more be on demoralizing the higher order, ordinary, mercantile defenders of Progress, rather than the highly motivated, underpaid, but religiously devout progressives. The focus tends to be on people like the Social Justice Warriors, most of whom make little money, contribute little materially to the state, and are themselves repulsive to the enormous numbers of normal people who are otherwise loyal to the established order of things.

And this now leads to the reuntroduction of that evil doctrine of the NSDAP: that some lives are not worth it. That it far better to ease people into death. As if this life is but all there is, and there is no more: no accountability, no judgement.

And if we can micromanage and control our circumstances from birth to that final lethal injection.

An entire Country sinks into the deepest pit of atheism, and a chap who apparently has the title of bishop finds he must go to the press to express a purely secular grievance: that this army of atheists runs some risk of not going to hell in sufficient comfort.

The article – published in a Catholic weekly, and therefore not suspect of having kept out the spiritual part – has only the vaguest mention of “spiritual care”, but the fact that the vast majority of people doesn’t ever think of dying with any sort of sacrament – real, or Protestant – or even the slightest sort of preparation (as in “forgive me, Father, because I have sinned”) does not register at all with the bishop. Does he have idea of how many people die in utter atheism? Of course he has! He just doesn’t care! But look, that chap there died suffering! How horrible!

It all makes sense, of course. If the bishop believes in God, it is obvious he has no thought of hell. If you are not worried about hell the immense drama of all those people dying in their atheism is just nowhere to be found; but let an ombudsman whose existence many of us did not even know make some noise with some extreme and isolated cases, and there you have the man on the barricades.

The bishop complains people can’t die well anymore. What he does not say is that in order to die well you need to think well; which is something he is unable to do in the first place, but demands from other that they get it out of he does not say what; because hey, damnation and hell are taboos in modern Catholic publications.

But hell is exactly the matter: once upon a time people knew how to die because they accepted the brutal reality not only of life after death, but of an irrevocable judgment to be passed immediately after death. This obvious knowledge coloured their entire existence, and obviously greatly influenced their way of dying.

The bishop asks people to die better, but does not even mention what radical re-thinking is necessary in order to be able to do so. Worse still, he sinks himself into the same pit of wordliness by making of a purely wordly concern the main reason of his intervention.

Mundabor (who I have just quoted) is a faithful son of the Roman Church. He’s not a knuckle-dragging Calvinist who looks somewhat like an Orc, as your bloger is. So I say, in commentary: is this Bishop Catholic? Is he a Christian?

For I signed up to Medicine and took those oaths not to kill people, but to cure them. Not to destroy their existence, but to comfort: I’m appalled by abortion (knowing full well that my birth mother had a most inconvenient pregnancy) and disgusted by the suggestion that we should medicalize suicide. I spend a fair amount of my days persuading the despairing to live. For many interventions I do, I look at the death rate — by suicide — as an ‘outcome’ — noting that this is reduced by this medication and not that.

But the SJW and the state honour not the bleak courage of the mad, nor allow one to die as a Christian. It’s cheaper to encourage euthanasia: which is suicide dressed akin to an angel.

In this, for the sake of your soul, go not. Do not fall in love with easeful death. Reserve, instead, your wrath for that last enemy, and rage against the minions of death, who the spirit of this age encourages.

The petunias greens stupid make.

Now, I know people who have Gender issues. Some of whom want surgery, some of whom who do not. Some of whom are attracted to the sex they were born in, some of whom are not. And most of the time they have the same issues in most situations as the rest of us. They have to get on and make money, they care for their families, and they would like to have love (sex is easier to get when you are young and beautiful, but love is hard, when you are old and ugly — which is inevitable sex is harder to get and love remains difficult).

In my town we have a service that provides a pathway either to private surgery or the public waiting list for gender reassignment, that involves extensive psychotherapy and living within the gender you consider you are before surgery. I am told it gets good results — but I have never seen the data. The one thing I know is that without the talking therapy, the surgery generally does not resolve the issues. For gender is more than genitals.

The Greens want surgery to be funded. This infuriates me on many levels. The first is these people are lumped into some kind of group for political points. And the second relates to something that the petunias in the Greens will not recognize: the amount of money we have for services is limited. and the same people want to ban ECT, which saves lives.

Georgina Beyer gave trans* people all around the world hope that it was possible to fight discrimination and for them to be recognised for who they are, rather than their gender identity.

It makes me very sad to then hear the Minister of Health say he believes funding surgeries is a “nutty idea”, and that other politicians also dismissed the issue.

The public discussion generated by his comments has been very painful for many people. I am hearing that even some of our older battlers are really struggling. This makes me really worry for them and our youth.

This is a very real issue that is causing harm. There are a number of areas that need an increased health budget and this is one of them – I will be writing to the Minister about this.

*The addition of an asterisk to the word trans is to indicate that the term functions as an umbrella term for an extremely varied range of identities, including culturally specific ones. I use it to include identities such as: whakawahine, tangata ira tane, FtM, MtF, transsexual, fa’afafine, transgender, transmen, transwomen, akava’ine, leiti, genderqueer and gender-neutral people.

The second level is the perversion of the language. We are being told to put an asterisk in a word. We are being told to not only use the words that have meaning within a culture such as whakawhaine and Fa’afafine. but neologisms. We are not using the international criteria — they do exist — which means that we are not able to apply the research as to which interventions actually work to people who are distressed and suffering. Instead the Greens believe, again, that their theology trumps evidence, feelings trump science, and the bitter experience of both clinicians and patients, developed over many years, is to be ignored.

Secondly, I am looking at my employer, who has tried to keep services going. For cancer treatment. For hips, knees, ear surgery… the everyday stuff. And have deferred maintenance to keep services going. Have bent the budget, until it broke and the auditors told them that cuts need to be made. When we have limitations on access to cancer services, when we cannot get needed and lifesaving procedures done… other things have to wait. Which is what the minister said — as a medic, he has been in the situation of telling people that their cardiac surgery booking as been cancelled because rationing.

In the ideal world, we would not have gender issues, for we would all be perfect, and perfectly happy. But this world is not ideal: the problem is real, and so is the suffering.

But so is the need to ration services. And using a group who suffer to play wedge politics in a health system that is underfunded is unconscionable.

Hat tip David Farrar.

Why I am pukeko: Why I am Chris.

I respect those who fight the good fight, regardless of which church they belong to. The strategy is to remain faithful and do good. But this can come at a cost: one I may face personally.

I almost lost an authorship on something I have just sent in because I disclosed all my conflicts of interest… including giving paid talks for a drug company before I became an academic. When I took the university salt, I stopped doing this: by the time I submitted that the period in question was more than five years previous, and the authorship stands (the paper is now in a pre publication queue: the wheels of research grind slowly).

And I have had HR people saying they would never hire me. My response is simple. At my level, HR is kept well out of the loop.

I never cease to be amazed at how many people write on this and many other blogs and simply put their name there. Some of them may be pensioners or housewives, but for many others it may really not be the prudent thing to do.

Go back only ten or fifteen years and reflect whether you thought, then, that today people could be publicly lynched merely for donating money to a cause that fifteen years ago was simply seen as understood, and shared by every decent person. It is happening today, and it is happening on a massive scale, with the accusation of “homophobia” levelled at everyone who does not comply with the demands of the Gaystapo.

Now follow the timeline, and imagine what might easily happen ten or fifteen years down the line. The screening company working on behalf of your potential employer will fish (the Internet is an awfully open space) all the comments and statements you have left in the public space. If you run a blog, they will find it. But even if you simply write comments on blogs and fora, they will locate them without difficulty.

Their report to your perspective employer will then express “concerns” about the “hate” nature of your statement, and forecast “difficulties” of “integration” in a “diverse” environment. You will, then, easily be rejected.

Most of the time I sign in here as Pukeko. That is because that is how I set up the wordpress site (which is not on a big corporate server, but on server I pay for). My name is obvious: and there are but two academics in my field in my town. As part of my job I talk to the press about research findings, and have now (unfortunately) become familiar with reporters.

I’m easy to find and fairly easy to take down. [At some cost: finding someone who will do my job is a challenge — we have been recruiting for an open academic post for about five years but not many people will eat the pay cut that happens when you move from clinical to academic work].

This is from an editorial in my professional journal, and outlines the problem.

Our trainees are by then in their late 20s or older, have graduated in medicine, worked 1 or 2 years as an intern, then completed the obligatory 5 years of training for the Fellowship. They often have a partner and dependents and will probably have accrued substantial debts and a mortgage. A few recognise that they are strongly attracted to research, but have little understanding of how to get started. Concurrently, the alternatives of well-paid salaried appointments or the autonomy of private practice are compelling attractions, while the alternative of a path in academic psychiatry offers the prospect of a relatively poorly paid training post, followed by a disparity in pay and conditions compared with fully clinical posts for the remainder of the career.

In both our countries, it is at this critical stage that the present academic career path is both uninviting and unhelpful. The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC)1 offers Clinical Research Postgraduate Scholarships for medical graduates at a salary of AUD40,057. For the single applicant who is ranked highest, there is the special Gustav Nossal Stipend of AUD47,008. For trainees in general medicine, the Royal Australasian College of Physicians has 14 ‘Research Establishment Awards’ for its trainees to gain a foothold in research, offering supplementary stipends from AUD20,000 to AUD70,000 for 1 year. Our own College offers New Investigator Grants of up to AUD6000, a Research Scholarship of AUD50,000 over 2 years and a number of smaller awards. For more formal research training, an alternative entry point is an NHMRC Early Career Fellowship. These have been established ‘to foster career development at the postdoctoral level by encouraging the beneficial experience of a different research environment’. They are offered ‘to a limited number of persons of outstanding ability who wish to make research a significant component of their career’.2 The salary is about AUD70,000 plus a AUD15,000 loading for medical graduates. A successful applicant typically starts a Fellowship already with a PhD, an average of 12 publications, has had previous NHMRC funding, has presented at international conferences and has more than once been interviewed or written for the media. The success rate for applicants is around 25%. A newly minted FRANZCP would have little possibility of obtaining such an appointment, even if they found the stipend acceptable.

I would add that the salary for a newly minted FRANZCP in public practice in both countries is at least 120 000 if full time, and often a lot higher. As a result I’m still considered one of the younger academics, and I’m in my mid 50s. It’s interesting that it is in the non STEM fields that the thought police run untrammelled through the halls of academia. In STEM, most academics can get a job fairly easily, doing their job.

Which is why I don’t mind people knowing I’m Chris Gale. I like what I’m doing, and I like this town. It has helped my boys. I have a loyalty to my employer, and I keep the boys and the photog and the parents and the Canadian progeny’s names well off these pages.

But I will not fear this elite. Among the academics, I add a certain spice, akin to cayenne pepper, to the blandness of the left. But if the university does not want me, I can return to the island that raised me and trained me, or move to another place to serve. And serve I will, as long as my health lasts, and I am permitted to do so.

But let not fear silence you. Fear is the mind killer, and the elite show that by their stupidity.

We need to compete. [Bring back Bullrush]

I first read this a few days ago and I could not get this out of my head. It makes no sense. On Saturday I went to the Pro Photog’s place and we were playing a card game with her family and friends. For fun. But we were keeping count of the score, and that made it more amusing. Particularly as the Pro Photog was winning for a while, and then one of the guests started winning… and then it was shared around.

Three women, Two men. And cards for fun, and conversation, and we kept score.

The main reason that I have gone paleo, or the main trigger, is that there is a competition at the gym about percentage weight loss, and they are suggesting low carbs as the way forward. I may not win, but I am competing. And the pro photog texted me after the a badminton tournament — because she won all her games, which made her happy and me happy for her.

Then I read this and wonder why the stupid is happening.

When we finished that task, the boys and I played a game to practice categorizing vocabulary items which involved competing to see who could be the first one to accumulate a word from each of five given categories. I guess you could say everyone “wins” if they participate because they learn the words, but the actual game (and the only part the boys really cared about) involved someone winning by beating the other players and being first.

The boys tried to remind each other regularly about their individual imminent victory. However, it was really stressing out the mother who was watching; whenever her son would get excited about acquiring another word and start to say “I’m about to win!” she’d jump in and say, “It’s not about winning; that’s not the point.” I finally gently and respectfully pointed out that the game was in fact a competition and the object of the game was to win.

That was twice in one week that I had noticed the same thing from two different mothers, and I wondered what was going on with all this mother anxiety about children competing and getting excited about trying to win.

What. the. Hell. is. wrong. with. these. mothers.

Have they not got boys? Have they never seen them play computer games? Competition is part of being human. It is part of being male. Not everything is shared. In my youth I never won the first prize in any cross country race, but I competed — and fought for a place in the top 20, which helped the squad win, even if someone from the another squad took individual honours.

Competition is good. It teaches you, particularly if you have a Dad on the sidelines who is doing his job, to be gracious in defeat, and in victory. Competition teaches risk. And competition exists in every playground, where it is compulsory (at least before puberty — when the boofheads prefer to chat up the girls during breaks rather than use you as a tackle bag in bullrush[1] you can go to the library and curl up with Tolkein, but only then).

It is far better to learn about risk on a field where you land on dirt and the worst thing that can happen is a broken arm than be sheltered until adulthood, when far worse things can happen to you, with far less ability for you to manage the associated risks.

My only hope for these poor boys is computer games. I am reliably informed that trash talking is not merely encouraged, but graded there. Which is why it is the favoured electronic means of communication of those under 30 in Casa Pukeko.


1. I am not making up the broken arms: we had one a term at my intermediate school (ages 10 to 12). The rules are fairly accurately described here.

Sunday Worship.

Well, we will go somewhere else for church because Casa Pukeko slept in to a man. Grace has services at 11.

Which means we have time for a worship post.

To the choirmaster. Of the Sons of Korah. According to Alamoth. A Song.

God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble.
Therefore we will not fear though the earth gives way, though the mountains be moved into the heart of the sea, though its waters roar and foam, though the mountains tremble at its swelling. Selah
There is a river whose streams make glad the city of God, the holy habitation of the Most High. God is in the midst of her; she shall not be moved; God will help her when morning dawns.
The nations rage, the kingdoms totter; he utters his voice, the earth melts. The LORD of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our fortress. Selah
Come, behold the works of the LORD, how he has brought desolations on the earth. He makes wars cease to the end of the earth; he breaks the bow and shatters the spear; he burns the chariots with fire.
“Be still, and know that I am God. I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth!” The LORD of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our fortress. Selah

(Psalm 46 ESV)

Notes around survival

Those with eyes to see look around and see risk, degeneration and a rough future. What should we do?

Screenshot from 2015-05-16 18:33:55

The first thing is pay attention. The second thing is do not stand out. Dress neat, dress a little lower than your status, dress drab. Do not look that high value. And do not be distracted, lest you be a target. I helps if you are male. It helps if you look fit. It helps if you are not armed: it is one less thing to be robbed of. Stuff belongs in a backpack or pockets: your hands are free.

Be aware of the rules your society lives by. Where I live, you don’t carry a Leatherman: it counts as an offensive weapon. Much of the information on the survivor blogs has use, but if you are obviously storing things and have a fairly large arsenal of guns… in NZ the police will think you are a swivel-eyed loon, and confiscate them, and in the feral parts of the USA you will be called a target.


If you have a family, and you can, get your family and yourself established somewhere safe. I live in Dunedin for a reason. Moreover, I chose a suburb which requires the average SJW troll has to climb to get it, and then my house is another 50 m above the road. And I’m thinking of moving further out.

But if you need to go into town, keep your antennae out.

In order to stay out of the ever mobile Boned Zone, wherever you reside, speaking to mass transit and cab operators is an excellent source of intelligence. Cabs are as often used by wounded crime victims—those still ambulatory—as are ambulances. For one thing they are quicker and cheaper. Gathering intelligence is the first step toward forming an action plan. Begin with those who work in close proximity to crime, and preferably in the business of operating the type of transportation used by the light guerilla infantry that constitute the purge strike teams in America’s urban centers. Other good sources of info are security guards and managers at local retail outlets which see a lot of traffic, such as liquor stores, drug stores, convenience stores and supermarkets.

There was a now dead blog called Old Remus, and his motto was “Be where the crowds are not“. That is, generally, good advice. In the smaller towns, you are known: you are seen as a citizen, you are seen as self-reliant, but in the city you are a resource to be exploited. Being nice, having the correct progressive values are immaterial: consider Baltimore, where the rioters, knowing that there would be little to rob in the poorer parts of the town, decided that if the area was full of white people it could benefit from some creative looting.

Above all, even in times of crisis, do good. Using the church: use it as a witness for Christ, use it as a storehouse, use it as a shelter. For when times are hard naked is the back without brother to cover it. And care for others. Regardless.

And what if you find yourself in a total societal collapse, with no end in sight? Pray about it. Then give until it hurts.

Do your best to provide for those that are less fortunate and those that currently lack the foresight to stock up for potential bad times. I’m sure that there will be a lot of such people wandering about when the balloon goes up. Consider yourself an ambassador for Christ, and act accordingly. Do it for God’s glory rather than your own. BTW, it won’t hurt to hand out a few gospel tracts along with the grub. Do so with the accompanying words: “Its the Christian thing to do.” That might sink in with a few of those folks. ‘Nuff said.

For we are not on this earth to hoard our life nor to be reckless, but to live quiety, soberly, and righteously. For the glory of God.

Do not ask permission. Do not beg forgiveness.

I love masculine conversation: where one can use sarcasm, where one need not care about trigger warnings, and where there is a nugget of truth contained within. The correct word for a servant who is looking after resources for his master is the Steward. Or, if ennobled, the seneschal: if married, the husband, if a parent, the mother and father.

The irony is that Churches could actually disciple young men and husbands if they taught the unvarnished truth: Please God through desire to adhere to His will.

It’s not about performing for God. God doesn’t need men to perform for Him. Rather He wants us to desire to do His will and worship Him in Spirit and in Truth. Out of the heart comes the desire to do His will and that springs forth good works.

Instead they revert to teaching the heresy of performance. “Servant leadership” becomes the task about serving the wife the way the wife wants to be treated — serving her feelings — rather than God. Even if you had the most pious wife in the world installing her approval over that of God is akin to a false idol

But the modern church no longer worships God. It instead worships feelings: that sense of spirituality has to be enhanced, and that sense of guilt and shame expunged. There can be no negative consequences, and all must be winners. There is no sin, no damnation, no guilt, and therefore no need for repentance, and we stand congratulating ourselves in front of a meaningless cross, in some perverse inversion of everything the gospel says. And using oxymorons like Servant Leadership helps. The concept is subverted by those who would destroy the gospel and keep the form of religion having gelded it. If they are offended by Keoni’s blunt speech, then they need to examine their souls.

In my opinion, “Servant Leader” is the perfect description of the Supreme Order of Latter Day Orthodox Churchianity: It is a title for any husband who is a member of The White Knights of Our Lady’s Sacred Imperative.

It’s a title for an office that bestows upon all married men of the faith, all of the responsibilities and accountability of being a leader, but restricted solely to the privileges and benefits of being a servant.

Martyrdom Inc. – Churchianity sanctioned Marriage 2.0.

I say one should quit worrying about using that term or trying to reclaim it or say it’s the proper answer to WWJD. It’s more like a signal or red flag, clearly revealing to those who have the eyes to see, a false prophet preaching a false and corrupt doctrine.

If you are in a church in which the Father, Pastor, Preacher, Reverend, Bishop or whomever is supposedly in charge of the congregation, and you hear them preach the doctrine of defining husbandry as SERVANT LEADERSHIP… NEXT that church and find one that truly worships the Father and the Son, rather than that pagan goddess bitch.

Now, Scott has linked in the same conversations and in his own blog to what some are calling the Benedict Option: seeing the monastic movement as something that preserved civilization. That small, intentional communities will survive. This can be summed up in this paragraph, but go read Scott’s comments.

An eloquent case for traditional families is currently being made by the chaos and dysfunction set in motion by their absence. No amount of legislation or social programs will succeed in replacing the most natural of human traditions. The social corrosion represented by our over-populated prisons, births outside of marriage (over 40 percent in the general population and over 70 percent among non-Hispanic African Americans), and similar phenomenon continue to predict a breakdown of civility on the most fundamental level. We passed into the “Dark Ages” some time ago. The “Benedict Option” is already in place. It is in your parish and in your marriage. Every day you endure and succeed in a faithful union to your spouse and children is a heroic act of grace-filled living.

I am seeing the damage caused by this fungible marriage. As Hearthie pointed out today, our legislators are doubling down: they are driving us into as deep a marital debt as a financial debt. But what cannot continue, will not. What the elite are managing, in all the Western social democracies, is an elaborate system of transfer payments that rely on the force of law and sufficient productivity to afford to subsidize day care, have make-work jobs, and a substantial proportion of women neither productive at home nor at work, but living with the state as their husband and various men as sperm donors.

But the places where this is most apparent: New York, Illinois, California, France and Greece — are bankrupt. (In NZ we have reformed this. We have changed our family laws to encourage shared care. We have got rid of alimony. And women on the domestic purposes benefit get it docked if they are not in training or employment when their youngest is five — these reforms were pushed through by a politician who herself was a solo mother).

So yes, we should stop expecting pagans to work by Christian values. In the more post Christian parts of the West, this has been obvious for a generation.

Yes, we should be intentional.

This will mean being very realistic about the weaknesses we all have: given a choice we will move to a physical relationship (so we ensure that we have chance of this until we are married).

This will increase the task for our womenfolk, for they will need to overtly teach women how to behave, using the many tragedies that happen as examples of what to avoid. This was the role of sensible women in the time of Austen: the cooler head of the married Lady was to guide the passions of the single woman.

This will probably mean subverting higher education, and moving to informal apprenticeships: attending the guild merely for certification examinations, and letting much of “higher education” collapse for it neither trains in righteousness, nor practical skills, nor supports scholarship.

But let us not delude ourselves. If we formalize this, as Augustine and Benedict did around the collapse of the Roman Imperium, we will be censured and closed. We need to do this locally, we need to avoid accreditation, and when confronted we should not ask for approval. If there are ministries that support young people to qualify and live righteously, we should use them. For me, this consists of letting my sons live at home and attend school from there.

We need to move to teaching life long marriage as vocation, agreed. And those of us who have been broken at the wheel need discernment. It may be that limiting remarriage (or not allowing it) may allow the church to keep discipline on this issue: that has been a solution in the past. My reading of reformed theology does allow remarriage, but I am afraid that this may lead to an acceptance of serial monogamy. And this I share with a certain theological geek called John Calvin.

So, let us all examine the scripture. Not the law of this land. For it is written by pagans. And on this issue, we do not ask them for permission, nor beg their forgiveness. It is God we need to obey, not the social workers or family courts.