The Religion of Lost Time

Dr Koontz and Rev Fisk open with a short discussion of video games simulating life without the meaning and wasting time that could be spent on real things, and then continue the discussion of the Spanish Civil War, talking about the interference of outside forces and the importance of creating ties with people in other places. Finally, they talk about the experience of Eric Blair (better known as George Orwell) in the Spanish Civil War and his books written not against the left, but against authoritarianism.

Books recommended: Mine Were of Trouble by Peter Kemp, and The Modern Survival Manual: Surviving the Economic Collapse by Fernando "Ferfal" Aguirre.

Visit our website -  A Brief History of Power

Many thanks to our sponsors, Blessed Sacrament Lutheran Church in Hayden, ID and Our Savior Lutheran Church and School in Pagosa Springs, CO

Dr Koontz - Agrarian, Egghead -  Concordia Theological Seminary Fort Wayne

Rev Fisk - Author, Fanatic - St Paul Rockford

Music thanks to Verny

Transcript:

[Speaker 2] (0:06 - 0:13)
Dr. Koontz, how do you see the role of video games in an enlightened society?

[Speaker 1] (0:16 - 1:56)

Laughing because I can't and don't, but am willing to be corrected. I'm not really the guy to ask because the video games that I ever did play were largely just sports and I didn't play them that much. I wasn't even familiar with the word gamer growing up.

I suppose I knew gamers, but I wasn't one. And so it's hard for me to see what the purpose is because it seems like a really intricate version of what we talked about with attention to screens, not just because it's on a screen, but that it provides a whole alternate world in many cases, the cases that take the most time of possibilities and challenges and achievements that could be directed into life. And so instead of, I mean, just my specific case where I would be guilty myself, I guess I could have gotten better at playing basketball.

I only played one year in middle school, but I was really good at playing this one basketball video game that I had. Now that didn't take up as much time as other forms of games might, but it's the same principle. So in an enlightened society, I would hope that the light with which they were enlightened would show them that we should direct our energies into reality rather than into the creation of things that may or may not actually improve reality at all, especially for that person that is devoted to them.

[Speaker 2] (1:56 - 2:18)

If you'd like to ask Dr. Koontz questions about gaming, video gaming, and if you play them at all, how it calls them to question, whether or not you're a man, feel free to write in and we'll, we'll take them on the air. Um, the, uh, I, I, you know, I, I have had to say tongue in cheek, but more like repentance and more like, I mean, it's a complicated question, but did you hear about the CCP and their solution? Cause I found that fascinating.

[Speaker 1] (2:20 - 3:15)

Yeah, I think we, I think we might've mentioned it before it, the idea that you would limit video games at the very least, like really strictly is insightful because it gives you way more time to apply yourself to things out in the world, even as a kid than otherwise letting that be unlimited. And the unlimited nature of the screen is because even where an entire alternate world is not created, right? It's just the alternate world of, you know, whatever sport it is that you're playing on the video game.

That's a world that is sucking in real time. And it's the investment of time that I find not, not just the money or whatever else, but time that you learn as you get older, especially is really the only precious thing.

[Speaker 2] (3:15 - 3:16) Yeah.
[Speaker 1] (3:16 - 3:32)

Because it's the thing that is, you are draining a bank account that doesn't get replenished. And I don't really find that morbid. I find that a salutary insight because it means that I care a lot more about my time than I do about this or that $5.

[Speaker 2] (3:33 - 3:41)

Knowing the measure of your days is pretty, pretty helpful. Generally you can learn it sooner than later, but you're not going to learn it on the screen. And that's, that's just a fact.

[Speaker 1] (3:41 - 4:03)

Yeah. Because the screen gives you a perception of time that is unreal. And that's why, that's why it, because your experience of the screen can be very much like the experience of love or things in which you take joy in that you don't notice the passage of time or time slows down measurably, right?

In order to accommodate the fullness of the experience that you're having.

[Speaker 2] (4:04 - 5:17)

You have to completely disregard the existence of any timeline your body is actually in and accept radical altered realities in which it's day, night, and then days, weeks later. And then we're back in the past and you have to, you have to live that actually. And then come back and try to be a normal person.

It's, it's brainwashing. It's nuts. I interrupted you, but I'm going to take the moment and say the CCP, what made it so interesting to me was when they scheduled these things Friday night, Saturday morning, Sunday night, like times you're going to have to sacrifice if you want to play video games.

Like they're going to make you pay for it. Like you're, this is your social credit and you're losing it. They're making it hard on you.

This is an amazing insight by them as a society to see the weakening factor that these things have done to the West is the reason why I don't think we need to worry about

them attacking right now because they know we're just weakening ourselves more and more. And the fact that they went after anybody who was effeminate and male as a pop figure recently, and they're increasingly doing that shows you again, they understand the poison and I don't want us. I'm not for the CCP, but wherever you are, you got to understand the poison.

And if the CCP understands the poison, you should take note, I think. [Speaker 1] (5:18 - 8:52)
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. The reality of weakening is based on something that I think is very profound about media experiences, not good, but, but deep profound. And that is that they simulate sometimes literally in gameplay or while watching the movie or whatever, but usually metaphorically simulate the kinds of experiences that are extremely meaningful in a human life.

Birth of a child falling in love, the death of a loved one, success in one's chosen path of life, things like that. And they mimic the lows of that, which actually sucks you in because when you experience setbacks, you'll either quit. I mean, some people will just turn it off, but probably, especially the more time that is, you know, invested, there's the sunk cost fallacy that, you know, this must be worthwhile because I, I've already spent 18 hours on it.

So setbacks can actually be productive of commitment. And then obviously satisfactions, joys, high points produce commitment as well. So that all gets simulated and it has nothing to do with your physical body or with loved ones or with anything or anyone else.

And the way to look at that is really, it's the way that if this were the 19th century, we would be talking about a man who, you know, went away on a ship and left his family and lost a decade of his life, you know, smoking opium in Morocco or Hong Kong or something. It's just lost time. The time's just gone.

It's totally, it's just gone. And just accept it, right? Just accept that that happened and just move on, you know, start afresh.

Like there's no, there's no, there is shame, but there should not be crippling shame with the idea that we have all wasted enormous amounts of what is so finite and precious, which is time. So just understand that and accept that and move on with your life. Because if you think of it as if you try to come up with, oh, but I learned this and I learned that.

And you know, it's like, who cares? You could have done that in a much faster and more productive way, almost undoubtedly in real life. So don't worry about it.

It's over now. Move on with your life. And that, that really is true.

Enlightenment is the ability to accept your, I think if you're able to look bad to yourself, if you're able to look at your life and look bad to yourself, either in the present or in the past, you are much closer to the kingdom than someone who's trying to constantly come up with a rationale for what, for why, what he did or what he is doing is actually the absolute best and the most amazing and everything like that. Because that person is blind to many, many things.

And most of all, he's blind to the fact that he's not perfect. And I think a lot of people when they're talking about, oh, well, this is why I play video games, or this is why I do this or that. What they're doing and the reason that they're so voluble, they say so much is because they have a bad conscience about it.

And that's, I understand that, but you have to just accept that you've done stupid stuff and there were some costs and there was wasted time. And that's a better place to start than anywhere else.

[Speaker 2] (8:52 - 11:10)

I think that's really good. I don't know how you convince somebody who is just new to this of that. And I don't know how you convince anybody of that, but, but I do agree with you entirely.

To answer the question that I asked you, which is what's the role. And you kind of, you kind of talked about as if there might be one, but you weren't the one to see it. So I'm going to go ahead and try to field a concern or a thought about it at least, because in one way, using the internet's a video game.

And it's, it's the real one. And if there's any value I got out of video games is that now I can apply what I learned to using the internet rather than having the internet use me. I think you can do that without having played video games, but if you've grown up using the internet, you didn't grow up without video games.

It's just, is it metaphorical? I guess, but not really. You're entering into a strategy game against algorithms and they're, they're drafted by people who are trying to manipulate your life, right?

So you're a hacker, whether you know it or not, or you're being hacked. And we all should know that plenty of information on that out there. And so is there a place for say like Pac-Man to be what you show like the eight year old that you're about to start training in what computer savvy?

And I don't know. I don't know. What I do know is that in my family's gradual recession from such things and movement toward real things, beginning with my own hard, and then everyone else convincing them to come along rather than compelling them to come along.

What, what I, the one thing I do know now, I just forgot what it was, but that's okay. What I do know is that, no, this is what I didn't know, is that when you convince them to come along rather than compel them, they come along and they have out of that a understanding of the problem. So now my kids are able to go, today we went somewhere and there was a TV there.

And right away, they were talking about how it was controlling their eyesight, how they couldn't help but look at it, how they didn't like what was on it. And they put books up to read in front of it, not because it was like, Oh God, the evil, you know, some mystical thing. No, they just actually saw like, no, that, that I don't like what that's doing to me right now.

And they could, they could discern that in themselves. And part of that is because we've gradually pulled them out of it. And then talking about what it feels like and how hard it is to resist these things as physical, chemical, spiritual realities.

Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (11:11 - 11:41)

Yeah. I, I mean, the reason that I, you know, I'm not, I'm not to kind of answer it is because I am very alive to the reality that one of the biggest problems that, that we have, because we give ourselves so little time to think is that I do not want to domineer over people's, you know, lives.

[Speaker 2] (11:42 - 11:42)

Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (11:42 - 11:59)

You know what I mean? I don't, I don't want to do that. I, I do think that it's the better part of wisdom, just not to be involved.

Like I, I don't think you're missing anything about a human life without video games. You know, I mean, everything you said is true. And if someone never even had experience of them, they would be missing nothing.

[Speaker 2] (12:00 - 12:00) Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (12:00 - 12:01) That's key. It would be missing. [Speaker 2] (12:01 - 12:02) That's really key.
[Speaker 1] (12:02 - 12:15)

So that's, I mean, if you don't absolutely need it, you, you probably don't need it in an enlightened society. Do we have anybody that actually knows how to like carve stone? Cause that could be really useful.

And I don't, I don't know that anyone knows how to do that. [Speaker 2] (12:15 - 12:20)

Yeah, no, that's a solid, that's a solid thing. So give your kid a rock for Christmas says Dr. Cook.

[Speaker 1] (12:21 - 12:25)

Yeah. Give him a rock and some, some Mason's tools and let him go to work.

[Speaker 2] (12:25 - 12:33)

Yeah. Because in what's coming here, like what came to Spain, that might be all you can for this Christmas. Probably not.

Maybe just in a few years. That is why you listen. It's just a segue. I didn't really mean it.
[Speaker 1] (12:33 - 15:20)

Dr. No, that's a great, that's a great segue because a Ford is a great segue, especially because what we're talking about today are the international involvements in Spain. And so along with that, in addition to George Orwell, possible international involvements in the future of the United States. And if you had international ties in Spain during the run- up to, and then during its civil war, you had a lot more wherewithal available to you than if your sources of wellbeing, uh, financing of, of guns, of food were exclusively domestic because we talked last time about the two Spains, but it's helpful to know that those two Spains have a multitude of power groups and nations and competing international pushers behind each of them. That what happens even before the shooting starts openly and widely is that in a state that is beginning to collapse, people don't just let that happen without intervening or doing something about it.

Because even Spain, I mean, Spain in the 1930s is for a European country was extremely poor and, and very undeveloped, largely agricultural. So it's, it's not the kind of juicy prize that the United States would be today, where even with all the de-industrialization that we've gone through in the past 45 years, 50 years, even with all the demographic change that we've gone through, where our workforce largely doesn't know how to do anything, largely, even with all of that, it's such an enormous market. There are so many resources.

Think about the fact that as Spain descended into civil war, there were powers that partly for ideological and partly for, you know, just hard political reasons, access, power control over resources, over people. There were plenty of people that were interested in affecting the future of Spain. So I'll outline that, but just to, I mean, how that worked on the left and the right respectively, but just to start, it's important to realize that if there is something up for grabs, like an entire nation, then there will be plenty of some ones who are interested in grabbing some part or the whole of it.

And I don't see why that would be at all different for the United States than it was for Spain, because there's so much more to grab in the case of the United States.

[Speaker 2] (15:20 - 15:39)

The markets at the bottom and economic collapse is called the bottom. I mean, if you got a chance to buy this, when you buy, I imagine you're going to hedge that thing because you got your billions here, but who's there, but maybe not. Maybe locally again, this is fractal people.

That was wisdom and insight right there, big time. [Speaker 1] (15:39 - 15:49)

Well, yeah, I mean, like the, our, you know, our favorite book, you know, official book of brief history of power, Fernando Aguirre's, Surviving Economic Collapse.

[Speaker 2] (15:49 - 15:49) Absolutely.
[Speaker 1] (15:50 - 15:50) Yeah.

[Speaker 2] (15:50 - 15:57)

People, listen, people, listen, I'm telling you, you have to listen to me now, people. It's a good book. It's a good book.

You got to get past that part, but it's a good book.

[Speaker 1] (15:57 - 19:02)

Yeah. He's, you know, talking, he's talking about Argentina and when Argentina collapses economically at the very beginning of the 2000s, that is when people that can tolerate risk and distressed emerging market debt swoop in, you know, you can call them vultures or not, but they're going to be there, you know, so whether they're feasting on decayed flesh, like vultures do, or however you want to describe them as activist investors, whatever, whatever phrase you want to use, they're going to be there. And in the case of Spain in the 1930s, on the left, you have a very highly organized effort. So let me talk about the right first, because it's not as organized.

On the right, by 1936, you have both the fascist regime in Italy and the national socialist regime in power in Germany. They both intervene with units that are almost undoubtedly ordered to go there, but are presented as volunteers. So these are people that really have no particular interest in the nation of Spain, but their governments do.

And so they are sent to Spain in order to fight on the side of the nationalists. Far more common than that, as help from Germany and Italy, were money and materiel, that is, you know, largely military supplies, but logistical helps of all kinds, provided to the nationalist forces, along with air support, especially from the German Air Force, the Luftwaffe, commanded by the half-Jewish commander that we discussed in the German episode. So all of this is in play, and they are officially in support of the nationalists.

There are a very small, because there's no sort of international coordination in support of Spain, on the right, anything like there was on the left, there are very small numbers of volunteers of all kinds. There's a really interesting book by a British volunteer for the nationalists named Peter Kemp, who wrote a book called Mine Were of Trouble. He is a fantastic writer.

And if you enjoy these last several episodes on Spain and on the Spanish Civil War, he'll give you a first-person perspective that is absolutely fascinating. And it issues out of his acquaintance with communists in Britain who support the Republican or red side in the Spanish Civil War. That's one of the things spurring him to join the nationalists as a volunteer.

Great writer, really interesting book, but he's pretty rare. There's way more support and coordinated international support on the left. But the stakes are, you know, obviously Germany and Italy want a nationalist, conservative, right-wing, anti-communist, above all things, government that's going to be supportive of their existence and their policies.

[Speaker 2] (19:03 - 19:05) So what does that do for us?

[Speaker 1] (19:05 - 19:06) For us?
[Speaker 2] (19:06 - 19:07) Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (19:08 - 20:31)

Well, one thing to realize is that there are people watching you, generally through the internet, and you can connect with them through the internet. I mean, I've talked about some of these characters before. I mean, you know, the Twitter poster Eugipius, who talks mostly about COVID, is a rare German speaking freely in English on the internet.

And those are connections that I think are easily built up, even without personal acquaintance, although personal acquaintance is also something that could exist. But international connection and international knowledge of one another can be highly beneficial, even just from the perspective of gaining perspective. Okay.

So what is happening in Germany, you know, or even within the United States? What is happening in New Mexico? What is happening in Florida?

Like, what is life like? What is going to school like? What is, you know, trying to get a religious exemption like in Rhode Island versus in Nebraska?

So those forms of knowledge can be upbuilding, you know, encouraging, really helpful. We've provided some of that on the Brief History of Power channel, but there needs to be more of that. And not just through us, that people have these interconnections that are mutually supportive.

[Speaker 2] (20:31 - 21:40)

Absolutely. Absolutely. And I'm going to take this moment to plug something, but I'll plug us first.

I think I said this in a previous episode too, but it's worth noting that Brief History of Power is doing well, that we are expanding. Really what we're doing is dropping me the baggage that was all the stuff I do on my own. We're dropping it because the numbers are good here.

And what that means though is I can compare you to others. You aren't my fans the way, say, my Saturday Morning Chill fans are. That's okay.

It's all good. It's the whole point is be in many places, have a good voice. So there's a whole other thing that's going on called the Mad Christian Mondays, and our subscriptions are less than the downloads of this show, but this is a newspaper for you on this show.

And if you're not getting it yet, and you're just like, no way, Fisk. Okay, whatever. Go away.

Revfik.com slash newsletter, go sign up. Mad Christian Mondays. All right.

Because what do you know? I learned today about how Ecuador, oh, this is such good news. I'm not going to tell you why.

Ecuador just adopted Bitcoin as its national currency. That is fascinating and it's a bulwark of Tide to come. So anyway, let's go back to Spain though.

Let's talk about it. [Speaker 1] (21:41 - 21:55)

So yeah, I mean, I don't know what all of that means. And we should talk about Bitcoin more in the future because the notion of national currency is- Currency. Yeah.

And yeah, I'm skeptical.
[Speaker 2] (21:55 - 22:00)
All about currency. Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. Be skeptical, diversify.
[Speaker 1] (22:00 - 26:14)

The flow of information as well as of material help is something that I think we need more of because especially stuff that we talked about last week, you know, churches helping each other or the church helping other parts of the church is something that really needs to happen because we do have wonderful people in very difficult places. And I know that they're helped by information such as we offer on here, but they could be helped in other ways by people who are in much less politically and economically difficult places in their churches. So those interconnections are things that you don't need me or Pastor Fisk to form.

I'm happy if we serve as conduits, but you can find out about and reach out to one another. That would be fantastic. Those are the kinds of things that are currently fairly informal.

Maybe they need to be more formal because the left in the Spanish Civil War internationally knocks it out of the park relative to the right because they have an organization that is run by the Soviet Union called the Communist International. And the Communist International bases a Soviet colonel in Paris, France, and he coordinates all volunteers internationally from a variety of largely communist parties and trade unions, but also social democratic, also, you know, kind of less organized leftist organizations. He coordinates their efforts to get people, men, stuff, but especially people into Spain.

And that coordination produces much larger numbers. So for instance, just known men who fought for the Republicans for the left broadly, which is socialist, anarchist, communist, variously in Spain, there are at least 2,500 men from the United States alone. And this is a history that people, unless you're on the hard left, let's say you're actually a member of, you know, some kind of fringe leftist group in the United States, people don't even know that this happened.

There's an entire group, and it's usually called something very patriotic, kind of generically patriotic. So the Italian group, because Germany and Italy, I mean, officially support, quietly, but officially support the Nationalists, but that doesn't stop volunteers from coming from those places. Germany, I'm sorry, Italy's group is called the Garibaldi Division after one of their 19th century fathers of their country.

The American group is called the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. So these are named in ways that are supposed to be generically supportive, you know, commanding support, especially from anybody that would hear of it. Oh, who's over there fighting in Spain?

That's the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. Oh, but they must be fighting for freedom. So the messaging is very good.

The coordination is good. It's not enormous numbers of people. But when you add up the number of different European and generally European descended countries, America, you know, South Africa, Australia, that send volunteers, the left way outperforms the right because they're organized.

And they're organized because the Soviet Union is willing to officially back this effort. And they do. They also send tanks.

So you get, I think I mentioned this before, you get these technological previews of the Second World War, especially the Eastern Front, with German airplanes fighting against Soviet tanks. But, you know, they're not necessarily manned by Germans and Soviets, respectively, but the technology is all there already. The left is just much better organized, as they were we talked about before in the run up to the Civil War.

The right generally will wait to be pushed to somewhere horrendous before it organizes sufficiently. But the international interventions from the left are just way more significant.

[Speaker 2] (26:14 - 26:28)

You seem to make the case at one point that the right failing to organize is, in fact, a principle of the right. And that is part of its problem and why it is going to continue to be in a state of losing, even though it fights back to survive constantly, too.

[Speaker 1] (26:28 - 27:57)

Yeah, because I mean, it will be like that as a general way of talking about, you know, whatever is being denounced as extremists, like thinking men and women have stable definitions. I'm obviously supportive, but the way that it's often ideologically and then because of that officially constituted in its political apparatus or its, you know, media presence is that the right will be constituted in Spain or anywhere else as the thing that is trying to put some kind of roadblock in the way or maybe more accurately, a speed bump in the way of the left. So we just want you to go more slowly, maybe a lot more slowly, but just more slowly.

OK, and that plea obviously is very weak and unappealing. So you won't get the young on your side because you're not arguing for anything positive or healthy or inspiring. You just say we want to die more slowly.

And that leads on a very practical level to being disorganized because you never know what you're up against and because you never know what you're up against. You're not sure how to organize yourself. If the Soviet Union says we are for a Soviet communist state doesn't currently exist in Spain, we want to see it exist in Spain.

That is just in the basic sense of the word. That's a positive program. I wouldn't assess it positively, but it is a it is a thing to be achieved.

[Speaker 2] (27:57 - 27:59) Yes. Action. Yeah. [Speaker 1] (27:59 - 27:59) Yeah.

[Speaker 2] (27:59 - 28:12)

Yeah. So, OK, the right fails to organize then in a sense, at least in Spain, because they fail to pay for it. And you have a group in the Soviet Union that is large enough to pay for it.

[Speaker 1] (28:12 - 28:12) Yeah.
[Speaker 2] (28:12 - 28:15)

BHoP 061 The Religion of Lost Time 1844

To sacrifice something of their own for another effectively.

[Speaker 1] (28:15 - 29:37)

You have a nice you have a you have a nascent power that is much bigger than Germany or Italy, even combined. And that is something that people have trouble seeing is that prior to the Second World War, Germany really is not all that strong. I mean, basically everybody goes through some kind of economic depression in the 1930s.

So you have a country that's devastated by the First World War economically, demographically, militarily. That's beginning to be rebuilt, especially the military portion of that in the mid 1930s. But it's not going to sweep all before it.

So the Soviet Union, which is bolstered economically, especially from 1919 through the 1930s by American investment and industrial know-how. If the if the listeners aren't familiar with that, just just know that America profited enormously from but also donated a great deal to the Soviet Union so that it could become economically developed. So the industrial infrastructure that's sending T-34 tanks to Spain is built off the know-how, logistical, managerial, financial, and the investment of people like Henry Ford.

[Speaker 2] (29:38 - 29:43)
Are there any enemies of the United States that we did not, in fact, build ourselves? [Speaker 1] (29:43 - 30:32)

I mean, yeah, it's I mean, the Soviets, the Soviet, it's kind of like every time you look into somebody that that conducts some sort of politically motivated mass shooting in the United States of any kind, basically of any kind, you know, he was known to the FBI, you know, or the FBI had prior acquaintance with Mr. Whoever, right? It's like, is there anyone who does anything heinous inside or outside our country to us that we don't already know about and have involvement with? You know, it's, it's, it's uncanny.

And the Soviet Union is just a collective version of something that you find with the people that I think it was back in 2015, you know, shot a bunch of people in San Bernardino, California. Why does, why do we always know about that? Why are we always acquainted with them?

[Speaker 2] (30:32 - 30:34)
Why does Pauli tear down her house with her own hands? [Speaker 1] (30:34 - 32:43)

I mean, but, but that, I mean, that the proverb has a sense of consequence, like, like this is what will happen to you, whether you intended or not. This feels like we intended, you know? And in the case of the Soviet Union, I know we intended it.

We helped them become an economic power. People who could actually be industrially capable of withstanding German assault, which they, they would be in the forties. So that, that's what you're up against.

And the difference between the second world war, the Spanish civil war is that anyone who could be configured as anti-communist, they could be expected to be anti- communist. Britain, France, the United States, industrial wherewithal, financial capability is not a communist regime. Certainly not openly.

Okay. There are very suspicious people in the Roosevelt administration, but we can talk about that at some other time. Not openly communist.

We put together something called the non-intervention committee saying we're neutral. We're staying out of this. Christians are being killed.

We're staying out of this. So it is something very notable is that the second world war is shaped around, just as the first world war was a story of inevitability and of moral evils that require a response from what we would now call quote the adults in the room. Basically all the same stuff, including what are euphemistically called work camps, what are non-euphemistically called concentration camps, what are completely non- euphemistically called death camps.

Those all exist on both sides in the Spanish civil war. Nobody intervenes, not officially except the Soviets sort of. Okay.

Behind the scenes and more behind the scenes, the Germans and Italians, but America, Britain, and France, who will, who will have such a moral problem with German invasion of Poland in a few years. Nobody's intervening in the Spanish civil war, not officially anyway.

[Speaker 2] (32:43 - 32:44) It sounds like Rwanda. [Speaker 1] (32:45 - 34:21)

Yeah. And so once you learn about enough human atrocities, you also learn about the selectivity of those who sit on high horses. That the reason that someone sits on a high horse and this, this goes back to the incapacity to look bad to oneself.

The person who sits on a high horse is someone who has an opinion on what everyone should do in every situation. But even when faced with his own situation, and I mean this on an individual level, but I'm speaking also here collectively, nationally, specifically, he has an opinion on what everyone else should do. But when faced with two very similar situations, he will intervene in the situation where he is likeliest to succeed and likeliest to benefit most.

And the identical situation where there's almost no benefit to be gained because financially there's almost nothing at stake for the United States, for Wall Street, especially in Spain in the 1930s. He has no opinion. Non-intervention is the policy of peace.

It's the policy of this administration. So you notice the selectivity of, of these moral peacocks who love to preen themselves at various times, because when something bigger is on the line for them, yeah, then they intervene. Then, then morality requires a certain reaction.

But where relatively little is on the line as in relatively poor, undeveloped 1930s Spain, intervention is indirect at best and not at all in the case of, you know, Britain or the United States.

[Speaker 2] (34:21 - 35:46)

And drinking will get you nowhere. I got a whole bunch that came out of that. It's just so fantastic.

I mean, just train your protégés with care to understand that those who follow you are not always going to do what you hoped they would do with that knowledge and those weapons you gave them. So maybe, maybe train your protégés with care, figure out who they really are. Man, the idea that markets are not accidental, no matter how chaotic they look, it's just, it's just made me want to leave again.

But okay, here's, here's the summary piece I want to ask about now, because we've been working on the idea of right and left and why they're bad to talk about and yet why we have to talk about them for a bit. And I've been trying to kind of then figure out, you know, what do I mean? You know, when I hear you saying it, what do you mean now, what do you mean now?

And so what I'm hearing in this conversation and building on the past ones, I want to see if this, this works out and we have like the serious one and then we have kind of the funny one, but the right are trying just whatever it is, it doesn't matter what it is. They're trying to conserve and the left doesn't matter what it is. They're trying to change.

And then I think the joke enlightens this, and maybe you can, you can reform these words better from the joke. Um, not the reform, the joke reform, the actual words I chose. So the right is trying to conserve.

And what that means is they're trying to die more slowly and the left is trying to change. And what that means is they don't care if they die so long as they grow.

[Speaker 1] (35:46 - 36:48)

Yeah. Yeah. No, I think, I think that's right.

And I think it's part of the power and the attraction of the left, especially for the young, because idealism is always attractive to the young. And those are, you know, I'm sure it's total natural coincidence. The young are also the people who largely fight and die in wars.

So if you are selling yourself as die more slowly rather than positively, this is what we are asserting. This is what we are promoting. We're promoting a family where a man and a woman, uh, have children and take care of those children and take care of each other for their entire lives positively.

That's what we're about instead of complaining about the fact that no one does that anymore, whatever. If you don't have something positive that commands attachment also in and through death, then you don't really have something capable of winning a war because you will fold under sufficient material hardship.

[Speaker 2] (36:50 - 36:55)
Yeah. That's so key. This goes back to the reactivity on the internet conversation, right?

[Speaker 1] (36:55 - 36:55)
Yeah.
[Speaker 2] (36:56 - 36:57
Why don't you talk about it? Yeah.
[Speaker 1] (36:57 - 37:48)

And I think, I think that, um, we're going to, I want to talk about a writer. I think there's a certain, there's a certain glibness promoted by the internet, partly because you're not seeing the people you're talking to, but that glibness or that, you know, here's my one liner, here's my two liner or whatever, you know, and it's not just Twitter. I mean, this happens all over the internet in part of it is because you don't see the person and you don't have to deal with his reaction to what you're going to say.

So glibly or so cleverly you think, but it's, it's a glibness that really is only in place. I mean, you should be, you should be laconic and brief when you are in battle. That's why the Spartans who are the best, you know, ancient Greek warriors, that's why the adjective laconic for saying things briefly, very succinctly is used of them.

And because that's, that's how they talked because they're in battle.

[Speaker 2] (37:48 - 37:50)
We will fight in the shade and stuff like that. [Speaker 1] (37:50 - 44:57)

Yeah, right. Yeah. We will, we will then fight in the shade when you're not in battle and when you are dealing with allies, you, you need to give people the opportunity to say their piece and for it not sound exactly like you and to figure out what you're talking about and what you mean.

Those understand that, that things that, that often now get framed, I think partly because of like YouTube streaming debates get framed as debates could be called discussions, conversations, whatever else. Those things need to exist for coordination to exist and coordination needs to exist on any kind of human level for the sake of survival. So you need to let people kind of say their piece, obviously within reason without being themselves glib or insulting or whatever.

Because if you don't do that, you're not actually able to coordinate it. If you can't coordinate, you can't build up the kinds of structures where eventually you can be laconic because you have someone that is in command clearly and can tell people what to do so that we all make it. Those are things that there's a writer who comes, who really is, his entire life is shaped by his participation as an international volunteer in the Spanish civil war.

And the reason that I bring him up is because he dovetails with that history that we're talking about today. But he also dovetails with something that I think we need to understand going forward, both talking about collapse, but also just generally. And that writer is a man whose actual name is Eric Blair.

His pen name is George Orwell. He is an English volunteer in what are called the international brigades, which are the collective name, again, notice that they have one, the collective name for the communist or socialist volunteers in the Spanish civil war. There are a large, fairly large number of British volunteers.

Orwell or Mr. Blair is one of them. On the basis of his experience in the Spanish civil war, and especially his experience of something that we've paid some attention to, but I just want to, I just want to say, again, the nature of the left is always fractious, because it's always a coalition of resentments. And the Spanish left was in the 1930s, no exception to that.

His experiences largely of repression, both in military decision making it within the international brigades, but also therefore, politically on the Spanish left, and therefore, what would be the outcome, like if the left won, who would actually, who would that be, who would actually be in charge? He saw Spanish, especially anarchists, and democratic socialists, repressed by Soviet command. And that's just because the Soviets were in, were in charge of weaponry and money and availability of lots of things.

So as he sees that, and after he sees that he writes a book that precedes Animal Farm in 1984, which are from after the Second World War, a book that I think if you've read those two books, if you haven't, you should read them. But I want to put them in a context that I don't see anybody doing. He writes a book called Homage to Catalonia.

Catalonia is the region where Catalan is spoken, capital being Barcelona. This was then and is now easily the most left-wing, just very generically, the most left-wing, socially permissive, anti-monarchical, openly secular part of Spain. It was then and it is now today.

Catalan independence in the EU is a very left-wing movement, much like Scottish independence. So Homage to Catalonia is both about his war experience, and it's very interesting, and it's well written, as you may imagine. But it's part of something that he's very clear about elsewhere in his writings, letters, stuff like that.

He wrote a lot. I mean, he was a journalist mostly, which is that Homage to Catalonia, like in his thinking Animal Farm in 1984, is about the evils of Stalinism. And they are a promotion for him, Homage to Catalonia being very explicit because it's historical and autobiographical rather than allegorical.

Very explicitly, he says, I am against Stalinism, and I am for democratic socialism. So the thing that I want the listeners to notice about 1984 and Animal Farm is that they're not critiques of the left as a force within Western civilization, which is what I'm suggesting the left actually is. It's fundamentally anti-Christian.

It's within a European context, generally anti-monarchical, but even anti-constitutional republic in the case of France. And what's provided then is to say that, okay, well, our real problem, read Animal Farm in 1984 in the context of Homage to Catalonia, our real problem is Stalin, right? He's Napoleon the pig.

He's the one that's trying to convince you that we've always been at war with this place that we weren't at war with. Okay. And it's his methods that are being critiqued in Animal Farm in 1984.

It's not a vision of a human society that has no allegiance to God. He's not critiquing a vision of human society that has no allegiance to the patrimony left by its ancestors, whether that's forms of government or cultural forms or sexual mores. It's not a vision of society that's whose basic problem is that it is completely cut off from its own past and it hates its past.

And it even hates a lot of its citizens right now, whether because they're devout Catholics in Spain or cis-gendered white males in modern America or whatever the intersectional target is. So what you're provided with, even in public school, I mean, I think I had to read Animal Farm in public school, you're provided with an idea that our basic problem is, we would often say in America, totalitarianism. What he's actually saying is Animal Farm in 1984 are basically about fighting on the left because taken as given is that freedom, whatever that means, certainly has nothing to do with God.

Freedom is what we're trying to maintain. And therefore, these evil revolutionaries who are really just revolutionizing an otherwise left-wing collective, these evil revolutionaries are taking that away. And I think it's interesting that even the right in America is forced to try to explain to itself COVID mandates and stuff in Orwellian terms.

Because the Orwellian frame is fundamentally a left-wing frame. [Speaker 2] (44:57 - 45:04)

It's the first dystopia in some ways then, right? Or at least the one that sticks and gives us that kind of way of looking at the present history.

[Speaker 1] (45:04 - 45:49)

Yeah. I think that it's a frame that says, your real problem is that Joe Stalin is authoritarian. That's your real problem.

So what you want is a democratic party or a green party that is at least theoretically transparent and anti-authoritarian. You want some vision of California in the 1970s or something. You don't want Joe Stalin.

Okay. It's basically just an assertion of a certain vision of freedom available on the Spanish left in the 1930s that his side did not win within the terms of that debate in the 1930s because the Soviets just mattered so much more for the leftist war effort.

[Speaker 2] (45:51 - 46:36)

So still trying to figure out for my own part then what to pull from this. And I think what I'm getting from it is that I don't know what to get from it. You got me stumped, so what should I see then in this?

No, no, no. Here we go. Stalin.

I asked, I had this written down like two times already before you then brought it up. I said, is Stalin communist? Was my question.

And I think, I know the answer is kind of no, but that's sort of what your point is here, right? Is that Stalinism and communism shouldn't be lumped together if we're trying to fight an enemy that's actually here. We have to figure out what we're really dealing with.

Hmm. Block me.
[Speaker 1] (46:36 - 47:17)

Yeah. I mean, yeah, he's communist. I mean, he is communist in a way that he thought would be effectively effective for the governance of the Soviet Union.

And he saw his predecessors as fundamentally chaotic. And conversely, Leon Trotsky's vision of how communism should be exported from the Soviet Union as fundamentally wrongheaded and chaotic. It's an, it's an intra left fight between Trotsky and Stalin.

And it's an intra left fight between those who oppose, you know, the pigs in animal farm or the dictatorship in 1984. Everything is within a leftist frame.

[Speaker 2] (47:18 - 47:24)

I guess if we're going to be in the fight at all, we're not the pigs, we're not the dogs, we're Aragorn or something. Right. We've got to come at it from a different place.

[Speaker 1] (47:24 - 48:16)

Yeah. I mean, we need to understand that we are neither animals oppressed by some master whom we need to throw off. And then the real problem is the revolution didn't go the way it should have preserving freedom for all the animals.

We need to understand that we cannot accept leftist framings of what the problem is because they're not even, they're not even plausible anymore. They're not even plausible. If there were any leftists who believed anything that they themselves say about labor and capital, they would all be as some of them used to be fervently against immigration of any kind, because on a sheer economic level, it depletes the value of labor.

Obviously. Obviously. I mean, it's, that's really basic.

[Speaker 2] (48:16 - 48:22)

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. You got to slow down. That was like addition and subtraction.

That was a long time ago, Dr. Kunz.

[Speaker 1] (48:24 - 48:30)

I mean, if you, yeah, if you have more workers available, they are relatively less valuable than if you had fewer workers.

[Speaker 2] (48:30 - 48:34)

You know, but we got modern economic theory now. So supply and demand is just not even.

[Speaker 1] (48:34 - 49:51)
Yeah. Right. We're, we're, we're beyond all that.

I know. I know. I've heard about that, but I think that you, I mean, you need to, this goes back to what medium should I use to judge?

I should just judge people based on what they say they believe and then what they actually do observe the gap and figure out what actually matters. So if they say they care about the worker, but they want vastly more workers, I mean, innumerable workers who don't have to get vaccinated to come over our Southern border, for example, obviously they don't care about the worker. Simple, simple.

So what I'm saying is even with landmarks understood as such used as ways to explain to yourself why you're against mask mandates or vaccine mandates or whatever it is that you're against, your framing is still always within, okay, well, the real problem is we're losing our freedom. Yeah. That is part of it, but a bigger part of why you're losing your freedom is because you have people who have no attachment to God and they don't think it's necessary for any purpose whatsoever.

So you're still reacting. And even your reaction to whatever they're doing next is within some kind of leftist framework.

[Speaker 2] (49:51 - 50:00)

The box they put on your desk. We're losing our minds. Dr. Coons, we're losing our freedom. We're losing our minds. They're crazy. They're crazy.

And they're like, no, you're crazy. And you're in jail now.

[Speaker 1] (50:01 - 51:40)

Yeah. I mean, I think that just translate this into American terms. This would be the equivalent of saying that my greatest heart's desire, my greatest heart's desire is to get the year 1981 back.

I want gay marriage to be totally unthinkable. I want it still to be, it was news in the Washington post that a place that we're going next with the national security agency. It was news that the national security agency did not fire what was just called straightforwardly in the Washington post, a homosexual who had been exposed as such.

They didn't fire him contrary to prior government practice in every agency. I want to go, I want to go back there. Okay.

I want to go back there. Well, guess what? In 1981, you could still really easily get a divorce and you could leave your kids.

And in 1981, you could kill your child in the womb. So is that really what you're asking for? Or are you asking for 2018?

You have to think about what is actually wrong and then begin to frame your positive things that will attract and inspire people in terms of what you just want to change rather than asking for a time machine. Because I think the, the right is often put in the position of asking for a time machine and what a lot of people, when they're saying, Oh, it's just like 1984. And I, I totally get that.

And I've, I've used those glasses myself, but what you're actually asking for is please give me the democratic socialist left of 1930s Britain back. Is that what you actually want?

[Speaker 2] (51:40 - 52:35)

I guess back to the comment about books being ultimately the worldview of those who write them, whether they're fiction or otherwise, and how in that way you can at least begin to discern what ideas are leading your nose and your heart and your mind all over the place. Whereas the amount of stuff you absorb off that interwebs is, is, is a much difficulter thing. You said something, you said a lot of things.

You said many good things. There's my most recent notes going back. Right.

And, and, oh, this is it. Repristination is dead. Trying to conserve the past that's already gone seems to me to be a flawed approach to any form of governance.

And so when the right makes its essence, nostalgia, that is, we will conserve what we have already gone.

[Speaker 1] (52:36 - 52:36)

Yeah.

[Speaker 2] (52:36 - 52:42)

It's they betray what you've said now in a very complex way that they are the, uh, the controlled opposition.

[Speaker 1] (52:43 - 52:52)

And yeah, they are, but they, the great political trick that the left is pulled off is that the right controls itself.

[Speaker 2] (52:52 - 52:57)

Yeah. Right. Oh, absolutely.
Through its own insanity. Through trying to save the past that's gone. [Speaker 1] (52:58 - 53:58)

Yeah. No, this is the person you mentioned somewhere in America, asking the person who just entered his church, if he's vaccinated, we, they don't, they don't need to operate through open repression. They don't need to, I think they're going, they are trying and they're going to try more because I think they're very incompetent and don't perceive why they have succeeded as much as they have, especially over the past 45 years in the West, but they don't need to, as long as they have people who are quote conservative people, theologically, politically, whatever, who will control themselves, who will be embarrassed by themselves, who will police tone, police, other kinds of police themselves.

Then they don't have to send somebody to shut your church down because you'll shut your own church down. Simple. And that is a reality.

[Speaker 2] (53:58 - 54:10)

False religion works. Dr. Coots, like when you convert to a false religion, doesn't it usually like make you worship somewhere else and like shut down and you, you abandoned the one. And I, maybe I'm metaphorizing things again.

[Speaker 1] (54:10 - 56:44)

Well, I think that if you look at, and something that I think a lot of Christians to their detriment don't have enough of a handle on. If you look at the old Testament prophets, you will begin to be able to collect a set of images that are not available from, from screens that will enable you to discern certain things. So for instance, the deserted city or the land that is laid waste or the city in which, uh, you know, the voice of the child or of the bridegroom and the bride is no longer heard.

So you'll begin to be able to perceive, okay, what does it mean that, you know, my great grandfather was one of 12 and I, and I'm one of one. What does that, what does that mean? And you'll be able to glean those images preached on the basis of revelation about a specific history.

And then those images will allow you to see things that you can't see right now. And one of those things would be, for example, what does it mean that I am being controlled and persecuted? Not so much by my government, because like I said, it doesn't need to, but by my own, what does that mean?

Yeah. You know, what does that mean for my own, you know, in this case, the church and what does that mean for me? And once the prophets, I think give you a special insight on these things because they themselves were going through them, right?

The prophets exist because Israel is in such decline and Israel's not always in decline. And the prophets know that and predict that, but it is sometimes in decline. And sometimes its hearts are, are generally hardened.

And if that's the case, as I think it is with us, then the prophets will be very fruitful for people, both the big ones, Isaiah, you know, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, but also the smaller ones call minor because of their size, not because of their lesser importance in figuring out what is going on and why, how did I get to a place? How did we all get to a place where we're doing this to each other? Because the alternative, and this is the alternative for the remnant in the old Testament, as it was for those Christians who survived the Spanish civil war and reconstituted themselves.

The alternative to infighting and the hardening of hearts is coherence, both personally, that is spiritually, but also collectively. And that coherence will and can and does providentially arise out of chaos.

[Speaker 2] (56:45 - 58:47)

Indeed, indeed, indeed. And of a natural order, as you've pointed out, and then there's even some wisdom that might catalyze it from time to time. Testing the spirit seems to be a big part of this then, and recognizing that a machine that drains your spirit is probably not one you're testing very well, rather it's testing you.

Well, and the question is, again, how well are you holding up to the rest of reality as you try to go on carrying these inputs from a variety of places that, sure, absolutely, we're on the internet. Providence has brought this to us right now as a tool for the church, but that doesn't mean the last 30 years of use have been really good. And then to shift gears again, but kind of, kind of, you know, your question about 1981 versus, you know, further back in time and what remains undone and what, you know, what falsehoods we bring with us because we didn't rethink them.

This is what I think we are, you and I, encouraging everybody to do out there is rethink it yourself. It is a time for ingenuity. It is not a time to repristinate old ideas.

If you've never read any old ideas, ignore what I'm saying. If you've read for three or four years of old ideas, it's time to start thinking and doing and acting. Stop worrying about the rest of it.

Stop trying to get everyone else to do it with you. Rethink what it means to be a human being from your engagement with the Bible and put your feet on the ground. And again, this is not going to go poorly for you.

Happy, happy is he. There's the God of Jacob for his help. Yeah.

So the remnant coherence working with outsiders, I think is key to, to bring it back to a little more of like maybe Spain, you know, these, these coalitions how does the right learn from that? It seems to me that while we don't want to adopt intersectionality because that would be to adopt fragility and the need for an enemy. We do want to have a way to build coalitions with unlikely partners.

[Speaker 1] (58:48 - 59:57)

Yeah. Yeah. And that has to rely around as many axes as possible.

So there would be one axis in your community for all the churches that you think actually want to stay open and can. So for instance, you know, maybe the Catholic priest in your community wants to stay open, but he can't by virtue of his policy, stay open if the Bishop wants to close it. But if you know, his Bishop supportive, then that's a guy you want to talk to, you know, the Presbyterian guy might want to stay open.

The Baptist guy might want to stay open. Another axis would be all the people who want, need, or think they desire for vague reasons, because they just started thinking about anything besides their phone and can, and consuming stuff recently when their employer told them they had to get vaccinated. That's another axis.

And you're going to access that through the people, you know, at work through the people, you know, at church through both and connecting those things as much as possible. Another axis would be all the people who want to get into homeschooling. I don't know how many there are, but some estimates, four times what there were two years ago, five times, I don't know.

It's bigger.

[Speaker 2] (59:58 - 1:00:26)

I know that. I just talked to somebody yesterday who was like, the guy's non-religious and they started homeschooling when they had to because of 2020 shutdown. And they didn't go back and it's all by computer and they kind of want to, they want more actually.

They're like, this is great. And he's like, it's just not because I'm a Christian. I said, no, no, no.

And I loved being able to say this with integrity. I said, the Christians just did this in the eighties because they saw where it all was going. He's like, oh, I'm like, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Speaker 1] (1:00:27 - 1:01:31)

Yeah. Yeah. No.

And that's great because I mean, and I was this person at one time, not because of COVID stuff or homeschooling or something, but just I was exiting a world of decay, let's say. And, um, you know, a Christian who would, uh, offer some sort of help or, you know, a, a way, a pointer along the way would have been extremely welcome, you know? And so anything that you can do to build those alliances, especially on practical levels of help, schooling, anything, those are going to be, those are going to prove to be extremely valuable.

I would also say that you're not going to collect enough stuff. We've talked about this with survival before. You're not going to be able to collect enough stuff and food for everything that might happen.

So make those alliances too. And they're going to have to be alliances. And that's actually good because networks are generally stronger than individuals are for all kinds of reasons.

So build those up and invest in those, invest in those human relationships. [Speaker 2] (1:01:31 - 1:01:33)
Yeah. Cause they'll be there when you need them.
[Speaker 1] (1:01:34 - 1:01:34)

Right.

[Speaker 2] (1:01:34 - 1:02:07)

Um, uh, to recommend it again, uh, the Aguirre book only because like before you go out and buy a bunch of stuff before you move somewhere, cause you think, you know, everything about where you should move. Cause you read it on the internet. Really, really read his book.

Cause he, he calls the bluff on a number of things. I mean, just one of them is like, you need the go bag, but y'all kind of need the stay bag too. Right.

That's when people don't think about much, you know? So anyway. Yeah.
Yeah. Where are we at for time? I haven't even looked and I have no say prepared.

Oh, we're right at the time. And so by listeners, just kidding. Where are we going to go from here?

[Speaker 1] (1:02:08 - 1:04:04)

We're going to go into some specifics about America, especially in the forties and fifties, because it's something that varies widely between what we are told about what America was for and what a lot of people observed at the time was going on in America. And the collapse here is not specifically military or even political, because it's not like the American government totally fell apart, but it is, let's say, social or personal in the sense that we're going to be talking about the collapse of American freedom. And because of the cold war, I think it was really, which happened right after the second world war, which happened right after the depression, really in the whole scheme of things, it was not noticed, except by certain observers at the time, how much was changing and how much was going away.

So we're going to be looking at that because, and this is partly spurred by the kinds of questions that I've gotten from a lot of different people, listeners and otherwise, about, you know, how do you, you know, how much and to what extent do you have to obey what the government tells you to do? And I've been saying things like the government was not regulating what clothing you could wear back in St. Paul's time. So Romans 13 is not about whether the government can tell you to put cloth over your face, but I want to put this in, I want to talk about that.

Sure. But I also want to talk in a specifically American context about what at the time that things were changing really rapidly in the thirties, forties, and fifties in the everyday lives of Americans, what people were saying about what was happening, because it's something that is almost entirely forgotten. And the American right, as we'll talk about, completely changed in its formation, its issues, its positioning after the fifties.

And so this is not remembered because these people were just eclipsed.

[Speaker 2] (1:04:05 - 1:05:14)

If you have questions that you would like to send us on the show, what you got to do is you got to join that us, the chill on discord and look for the power channel there, put questions and put a tag for Dr. Koontz or well, yeah, Dr. Koontz, and we'll try to always get informed by that. And you there who are with that community, we do rely on you to continue to push us forward in our own digging and resources and whatnot. One note, I mean, you said, you said something there about, you know, which laws, right?

The question, which laws, you know, was the, was the government really the right to tell me? Yeah. Something I found helpful for my own common sense, I'm going to say is that anything that I couldn't have known or done before the light bulb or the steam engine, I should not bind my conscience with because it's not really possible as a first principle for that to even exist.

Now, by some magics of history and wonderful blah, blah, blah, it's here now, but like, okay, so let me put this like far away from this moment. Okay.

[Speaker 1] (1:05:14 - 1:05:14)
Okay.
[Speaker 2] (1:05:14 - 1:05:17)
So let's say you haven't seen your parents in like 30 years. [Speaker 1] (1:05:17 - 1:05:17)

Yeah.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:18 - 1:06:10)

Your parents about to die. And you heard it once that if you don't see a parent before you die, you're going to regret it as a life. And so you drop everything you have and you drive somewhere and you get on a plane and you fly somewhere, you do all this crazy stuff.

And then, you know, it's the same relationship or whatever. It doesn't matter. The point is like, slow down here.

If you were in that situation, a hundred years ago, you couldn't even do that. So why are you letting it bother you so much? Just because you can, if anything, you have an advantage, not a negative thing.

So why is this driving you as a compilation, as a shame? It shouldn't. And again, I suggest this shows you how much these tech things have as a power over us.

It's kind of ridiculous how much that we can feel like we're supposed to do because of a GE commercial in the eighties. Now I'm not kidding. I'm not kidding at all.

You're listening to a brief history of power to white guys. You know where to find us or you wouldn't be here.

[Speaker 1] (1:06:35 - 1:08:54)

Where the Lord's word is faithfully preached and Christ's body and blood are administered at every divine service. Whether you are visiting Idaho or considering moving to Idaho, wouldn't it be nice? Please join the saints of blessed sacrament Lutheran church for the mass and Augsburg Academy Bible study directions, service times, and much more information about this confessional liturgical parish may be found at blessed sacrament Lutheran church.com blessed sacrament Lutheran church, historic Christian orthodoxy, the evangelical Lutheran faith in the beautiful inland Northwest at 7,123 feet. You can find mountains soaring above you and rivers running swiftly in the Valley below you natural beauty of every kind, but our God is richer in his gifts than this at 7,123 feet in Pagosa Springs, Colorado. You can also find God's word preached purely and his sacraments given out for your salvation at our savior Lutheran church and school located off us one 60, just west of downtown Pagosa. Our savior offers your children a wonderful place to learn of Christ and his wisdom week in and week out and offers you the medicine of immortality Sunday in and Sunday out.

Our Savior Lutheran school provides a Christ focused classical education that enriches the child's soul with the best that has been thought and said to the glory of God. Whether you visit while vacationing or hunting in the beauty of the area or whether you would like to join a group of faithful Lutheran Christians, our savior Pagosa Springs has what you're looking for. Divine service with holy communion is each Sunday at 9 a.m. and Bible class follows at 10 30. At more than a mile high you will find Christ in all his glory in the midst of his people at our savior Lutheran church and school a proud sponsor of a brief history of power. Find out more at oslcpagosa.org