Our Books

If you enjoy this site, please consider purchasing one of our books (as low as $2.99). Click here to visit our Amazon page.

Our Books

Our Books
Books by Trevor Grant Thomas and Michelle Fitzpatrick Thomas

Book Facebook

If you "Like" this page, please visit our Facebook page for
The Miracle and Magnificence of America and "Like" it. Thank you!!!

Latest News/Commentary

Latest News/Commentary:

News/Commentary Archives:

News/Commentary Archives (for the current year; links to previous years archives at the bottom of each page)---PLUS: Trevor's Columns Archived (page linked at the bottom of the table below):

Sunday, February 28, 2021

Woke Coke is No Joke (and Nothing New)

As much as conservatives in America love capitalism, many U.S. capitalists sure seem to hate conservatives—especially Christian conservatives. On virtually every issue important to conservatives of all stripes, large U.S. corporations (“Big Corp” for this column) stand opposed—almost unanimously!—to American conservatives.  

In other words, to the detriment of America and the truth, Big Corp has gone “woke.” Coca-Cola provides the most recent and egregious example of gross corporate wokeness. According to a whistleblower, Coca-Cola is forcing its employees to complete online training that instructs them on “What it Means to Be White” and how to “Try and be less white.”  

This racist training declares that, 

To be less white is to:  

be less oppressive 

be less arrogant 

be less certain 

be less defensive 

be less ignorant 

be more humble 



break with apathy 

break with white solidarity …  

No doubt this garbage is directly the result of Coca-Cola bowing to the evil efforts of the “woke” army of Black Lives Matter (BLM) and the like. As Al Perrotta recently put it, “Of course, it’s doubtful anybody with any brains in Coca-Cola’s leadership really believes such racist, divisive gibberish. But they do believe the Woke Warriors won’t let them rest until they push this poison onto their employees.”  

Thanks in large part to Big Corp, as cities were looted and burned across America in 2020, BLM raked in tens of millions of dollars. As reported last year by Jordan Davidson at The Federalist, Amazon, Pepsi’s Gatorade, Microsoft, Warner Records, Intel, and numerous other members of Big Corp helped to line the stuffed coffers at BLM. Of course, this will do nothing if not embolden BLM and its allies to continue their violent, destructive, and grifting ways. In addition, the lavish funding of BLM will further promote their racist agenda. None of this is good for America.  

Coca-Cola is far from alone when it comes to its corporate “wokeness.” Under Armour has also recently come under fire for forcing employees to endure “anti-white diversity training videos.” Long before “woke” and its derivatives entered our lexicon, Big Corp had surrendered to the agenda of the modern left. Decades ago, Big Corp quickly got on the bandwagons of the radical pro-abortion agenda, the perverse LGBT agenda, and so on.  

According to very recent polling by Echelon Insights, the top issues for republicans (yes, not all republicans are reliably conservative, but virtually all conservatives vote republican) that are a “problem for the country” are (in order of importance):  

·         Illegal immigration 

·         Lack of support for the police 

·         High taxes 

·         Liberal bias in the mainstream media 

·         General moral decline of the country 

·         Socialism 

·         Antifa violence 

·         China 

·         Legal abortion in the third trimester 

·         Election fraud 

·         Tech company censorship 

·         Discrimination against Christians 

Other than perhaps “high taxes” (and even this means something different to individual conservatives than it means to Big Corp) there’s not an issue in this list that Big Corp has taken a stand on that is favorable to conservatism. For example, “Corporate Supremacists”—as Brian Schuster described them in 2018—“love mass immigration.” What he means is they love illegal immigration. One reason for this is, as Schuster put it,  

A steady stream of immigrants means a steady stream of competition for jobs. Workers generate profit for multinational corporations, and the cheaper a company’s labor costs are, the more profit is left over for the corporate supremacists at workers’ expense. 

Just after the 2020 Presidential Election, the New York Post reported that “Big Tech” began lobbying the incoming Biden administration to “reverse President Trump’s stricter immigration policies.” According to the Post, “rescinding Trump’s [immigration] actions is the industry’s top priority next year.”  

Media corporations that are part of Big Corp are the main reason that conservatives are concerned about “liberal bias in the mainstream media.” Because this bias helps to further the left’s agenda, other members of Big Corp play along. In fact, in attempts to censor conservatives, many of them have sometimes engaged in advertising boycotts.  

Tragically, hundreds of members of Big Corp—including Amazon, Apple, AT&T, Best Buy, Capital One, Chevron, Citigroup, Coca-Cola, Dell, Delta Airlines, Dominos, E-TRADE, Food Lion, General Motors, Google, Hershey, IBM, Johnson & Johnson, Kellogg, MasterCard, Mattel, Microsoft, Netflix, Nike, PepsiCo, Sony, Starbucks, Target, Texas Instruments, Uber, and many others—have thrown their support behind the evil—and misnamed—“Equality Act.” Thanks to democrat control and the support of Big Corp, this abomination recently passed the U.S. House. Perhaps more than any other collection of words in recent history, the “Equality Act” epitomizes the “general moral decline” of America.  

As many others have already noted, the evil “Equality Act” promotes anything but “equality.” Among other disastrous consequences, if the “Equality Act” becomes law, it would make criminals out of those who live according to the biblical (and biological) view of who is a male and who is a female; it would gut religious liberty and compel speech; it would ruin women’s and girls’ sports; it would endanger women and girls; it would allow for children to be taken from their parents, and so on. Yet Big Corp finds all of this not only acceptable, but necessary. 

Clearly these “woke” corporations have forgotten their foundations and forgotten what allows for their continued existence and prosperity. They have forgotten—or choose to ignore—that they could only have prospered as they have in the United States of America. Most importantly, they have forgotten God and His law. As I point out in The Miracle and Magnificence of America, the United States is the world’s most enduring constitutional republic and the world’s most powerful and prosperous nation—which has produced the world’s largest and wealthiest corporations—because our Founders rightly feared God and dually embraced the principles of Christianity and free market capitalism (as espoused by Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations).

Many liberals in America—including many now in D.C. —would’ve long ago shredded the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution endures because it is worth conserving, and from the beginning of this great nation, conservatives in America have long understood that fact. If anything is worth conserving it is those things that have been settled for all time, and more than any other governing document written by mankind, the U.S. Constitution embraces this notion. 

Again, to the great detriment of America (or any nation) “wokeness” is a war on the truth. Like individuals, corporations embrace this deadly ideology because they ignore God and go their own way. As has been the case for all time, if we want this to change, we need revival and repentance in our corporate boardrooms. 

(See this column at American Thinker and The Blue State Conservative.) 

Copyright 2021, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor is the author of The Miracle and Magnificence of America

Tuesday, February 9, 2021

"Masking the Science": "We Wished Masks Worked, But They Don't"

One of the best takedowns of the "masks slow (or even stop) the spread of the coronavirus" narrative--sometimes known as "wear your (expletive) mask" narrative--was recently published by two Oregon physicians, Dr. Tim Powell and Dr. John Powell. Their excellent essay entitled "Masking the Science" was published on the blog of Evergreen Family Medicine where Dr. Tim Powell is the CEO and Medical Director. I came across the piece a couple of weeks ago, and linked to it from my site. 

Yesterday (2/8/21) I was dismayed to discover that my link was to a page that no longer existed. It seems their truth-filled essay has been scrubbed from their blog. I can find it nowhere on their site. Also, I can find no explanation on the internet as to why this piece was taken down. However, I can speculate. I imagine that the cancel-culture mask Nazis targeted (and threatened) these good doctors and thier business. Much pressure was then applied--perhaps even by those like-minded as the doctors on masks, but neverthless frightened by the cancel crowd--for the docors to remove their mask-narrative destroying post. What a shame! However, as many have often rightly said, "the internet is forever." 

Using the internet archive "Wayback Machine," one can still find "Masking the Science." In the name of the truth, and to help end the wicked, widespread masking of Americans, and to help end the evil lockdown of America, here is the complete essay (including many the many informative graphics used):

1/25/2021 Masking the Science

We have purposely avoided directly confronting the issue of masks because it is such an emotional and political issue. Like waving a red flag in front of a bull, the topic elicits strong emotions which overwhelms reason. We wear a mask in the hospital and don a N95 mask, gown and gloves when we see a patient known to have COVID-19. Masks are used for source control when patients are admitted with various types of infectious respiratory diseases. After the visit, we dispense of the gown, gloves and change into our regular surgical mask to continue patient rounds. In public, we wear a cloth mask to comply with executive orders and as a courtesy to others who feel afraid and uncomfortable. Like most of you, we rarely wash the mask, we stick it in our pockets, pick it out of the glove compartment or off the floorboard when we need it.

In truth, we wish masks worked. If they did, it would be a cheap, and easy way to control the spread of Covid. The idea that they protect not only their wearer, but also those people around them seems noble. We wished masks worked because citizens are spending billions of dollars on them.

We wish masks worked because most Americans wear them now. Telling them it was unnecessary will not make them happy. We wish masks worked because they have become a symbol for virtue and social responsibility. Anyone who doubts their utility is personally attacked; as though they don’t believe the viral pandemic is real, or don’t care about those who die from it.

We wish masks worked, because they distract from other important Covid related issues such as: school closings, lack of access for non COVID related illness, increased mental illness, elderly dying alone, missed youth experiences, substance abuse, suicides, increased poverty and homelessness, suppression of free speech, censorship of science, disruption of supply chains, government agencies used to oppress small businesses, restriction of religious gatherings, travel disruptions, isolation protocols, modeling over actual data, quarantines, lockdowns, contact tracing, and global harm of the economy that most impacts the working class, vulnerable and poor.

We wish masks worked.

But they don’t.

At least, not the cloth and surgical masks you see in the public arena. They litter the landscape and waterways. They are difficult for people with disabilities and small children. It promotes natural germaphobe tendencies and indoctrinates the young to see their fellow humankind as a sack of germs.

There have been many randomized controlled trials (RCT) and meta-analysis of previous studies that suggest that masks do not work to prevent influenza- like illnesses, or respiratory illness transmitted by droplets and aerosol particles – like Covid. This knowledge was the basis for the WHO and CDC recommending against the public wearing masks in the spring of 2020. It was repeated by authorities and experts at every level.

Dr. Jerome Adams, the Surgeon General tweeted, “Seriously people – STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing the general public from catching Coronavirus”

Dr. Anthony Fauci told 60 minutes, “There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask”.

In April, the New England Journal of Medicine wrote: “we know that wearing a mask outside of health care facilities offers little, if any protection from infection”.

What changed? Well, it wasn’t the science.

All studies are not equal. The gold standard of medical evidence comes from randomly controlled studies. Recent observational studies that were used to support mask mandates were poorly designed for confounding factors, carried out in medical environments, and then, impressions were extrapolated to the general public. Studies that evaluated the viral exposure of mice in a cage covered with mask material vs. caged mice without a mask cover does not seem to translate well to a world of humans who use their hands. In contrast, a recent Danish mask study of the general public that was performed in a prospective, randomized fashion did not endorse the current majority narrative and was vigorously criticized and suppressed by some.

A new drug, medical product or procedure would never be approved based on this type of evidence.

Logic argues against mask effectiveness. The size differential between viral particle or droplet size expelled from the human respiratory tract compared to the filter size of surgical or cloth masks is substantial. If you read the fine print on most consumer masks, one will likely read a statement such as this; “not intended for medical purposes and has not been tested to reduce the transmission of disease”.

The best studies are outcome based and measure “patient oriented evidence that matters.” A pharmaceutical company may show their statin drug greatly reduces cholesterol and science can show a correlation between cholesterol and heart disease. So, the obvious premise is that lowering cholesterol reduces risk of heart attacks.

Except it doesn’t. At least not for primary prevention in patients without preexisting vascular disease. It is why you must do the study. Does the intervention work in real world conditions?

In August, Pew Research reported that 85% of Americans said they wore masks in public all or most of the time. If this is so, and if masks are effective, why has the incidence of SARS-Cov-2 increased so rapidly? Why is there not a favorable correlation between mask usage and disease transmission in countries and states with different mask policies?

If masks and lockdowns work, why don’t they work?

The graph below shows the daily number of deaths per million in the UK, France, Spain, Italy and Sweden from March to December. The number to the right reflects the percentage of the population that report wearing a mask in public spaces. Sweden has the lowest number of deaths per million in this comparison despite only 7.7% of the surveyed population reported wearing a mask. For those who argue that Norway, Denmark and Finland have lower mortality rates than Sweden. They would be correct, but these countries also have much lower rates of mask use compared to other European countries (less than 50%). Masks have been oversold as a solution.

Dr. Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s state epidemiologist said, “face masks are an easy solution, and I’m deeply distrustful of easy solutions to complex problems”. He was right. Sweden now (1/23/2021) has fewer deaths per million people (1086) than the United States (1284). In fact, they have a lower death rate than 30 of our states. History is replete with examples when politics or religion meddles with science and adversely impacts solutions. Dr. Martin Kulldorff has argued against widespread public mask mandates from the beginning. He is a professor at Harvard Medical School and a leader in disease surveillance methods and infectious disease outbreaks. He describes the current pandemic policy of COVID lockdowns and mask use this way; “after 300 years, the Age of Enlightenment has ended.”

At this point, many do not need an expert opinion to trust their own intuition and lying eyes that masks are not working. Everyone wants to mitigate the transmission of the virus, but let’s focus on what works.

But, wearing a mask is so easy to do. Can’t you just shut up and wear the damn mask?

Why are we poking this tiger, this mask issue now?

Because there is mass hysteria, and many are blind to it.

Because it’s an irrational and divisive policy when unity is required more than ever.

Because evidence should matter.

Because in 2019, if we saw a father struggling to muzzle a terrified, crying 2-year old child on a plane with a cloth, we would report them to authorities for possible child abuse. In 2021, we kick the whole family off the plane unless the father is successful in his efforts.

Because of a young man with autism who is unable to tolerate a mask on his face is publicly shamed.

Because the masks offer a false sense of security and may adversely impact more important public health mitigation measures.

Because our local high school cross-country teams should not be running the trails wearing masks.

Because the Oregon Board of Medicine suspended the license of a physician who objected to this policy.

Because one of the greatest losses in this pandemic has been the loss of credibility of organizations for whom we held in high regard. Organizations such as the CDC, WHO and Public Health Organizations that need to maintain the trust of the citizens.

Because it is increasingly apparent that the basis for the mask mandate is not medical, but political.

Because fear and panic should not prevail over actual evidence, even when many powerful institutions have expended so much political capital promoting the wrong policy.

We wish masks worked.

We wished we didn’t have to fight about them.

But they don’t.

And we do.

Tim Powell MD
John Powell MD

If you want to see more graphs, we have included them below as well as a video demonstration.

In September 2020, the CDC acknowledged that SARS-Cov-2 could be spread in an aerosolized manner. Masks are ineffective against this mode of transmission. Early in this pandemic, some physicians showed video evidence of how masks might work as a source control for droplet transmission of COVID-19. Unfortunately, this is not the case for aerosolized transmission of viruses as demonstrated in the video below.

Monday, February 1, 2021

Democrats' Climate Agenda Will Mimic Their COVID Tyranny

If you’ve enjoyed the last 10 months of foolish, science-denying lockdowns and mask mandates, the widespread destruction of businesses and economies, the government telling you what jobs are “essential” and how you are to conduct yourself in your own home, then you must absolutely love the democrats’ climate agenda.

For decades, the climate cultists from the “New Religion of First World Elites” have attempted to use fear—the destruction of the planet—and a fake cause—saving the planet—to convince Americans to vote for democrats and enact the perverse science-denying climate agenda of the modern left. For a primer on how this would work, look no further than 2020.

As soon as the Wuhan virus entered the U.S. in early 2020, democrats across the U.S. saw it as a means to a political end. Of course, consumed with hatred and obsessed with the removal of President Trump, the 2020 Presidential Election was their primary political target. To help accomplish this, democrats in politics and the media rampantly spread Wuhan virus fear porn. Subsequently, democrat mayors and governors across the U.S—encouraged and enabled by their like-minded allies in D.C. and the media—enacted widespread and economically devastating lockdowns and accompanying measures.

In spite of the fact that most of these measures were unproven and unnecessary—time again has proven this true—the democrats persisted because “orange man bad.” They also persisted because, to paraphrase David Horowitz, inside every leftist is a totalitarian screaming to get out. Because of their lust for political power—because they have made a god of government—leftists are always looking for the next problem that their government elites (supposedly) alone can “solve.” Again, the Wuhan virus provided an excellent opportunity for this.

If you can convince people that they’re going to die if they don’t do as you say, those in power hold great sway. As C.S. Lewis cautioned lovers of liberty in the mid-twentieth century, “A hungry man thinks about food, not freedom.” Today, a corollary to this would be, “A man living in a pandemic thinks about remaining healthy and alive, not about his liberties.”

Likewise, if you think the planet is doomed if we don’t do away with fossil fuels or stop eating beef, then you are probably willing to give power to those who promise to take such things away—by force, if necessary. After all, if the planet is doomed otherwise, what force to do such things could be unjustified?

Whether a virus “emergency” or a climate “crisis,” in an attempt to justify their totalitarian agenda, leftists the world over tell us that we must heed their so-called “experts” along with their computer models. Most often, the main role for these “experts” is to give a Big Government, which is already too willing to encroach on our lives, even more of a reason for doing so. This is especially true in times of crisis, whether the crisis is real or manufactured.

Sadly, as 2020 well demonstrated, in such times many of us are far too eager to become what Lewis called in 1958 “Willing Slaves of the Welfare State.” Typically, in order for any oligarchy to rise and rule effectively, it needs some “extreme peril,” something to cure, some desperate need that the rulers promise to fulfill. As Lewis asked, is this not “the ideal opportunity for enslavement?”

When a generation lives in fear or dread of some looming crisis or when a society is made to believe that someone else can provide the things that it supposedly cannot live without, is this not the opportunity for those who seek to rule over us to be seen as liberators rather than the totalitarian tyrants that they are?

Today’s totalitarian left is devoted to scientism, and their government can well be described as a technocracy. Thus, when the American left is in power, the motto of the technocrats prevails: “only science can save us now” or “science is the way out.” Whether it is a global pandemic, global warming—excuse me, “climate change”—stem-cell research, the beginning of life, healthcare, crime, homosexuality and marriage, or even gun control, racism, or economic policies, the technocrats claim to have the answers.

Scientism almost always leads to a technocracy. “I dread government in the name of science,” said Lewis. “That is how tyrannies come in.” What a profound conclusion! How many of us have been duped in the name of “science?” How many of us cower and yield—or “shelter at home”—because, well, if the “scientists” (and then the politicians) tell us to do so, then we must do so?

Sadly, too many of us then grow accustomed to our chains. We become children, or pupils of the State (like “Julia”). We continue to elect leaders who perpetuate the cycle of the “Welfare State,” based significantly on the lies of scientism. Like their agenda to fight the Wuhan virus, the left’s climate agenda reeks of scientism and technocracy.

There is hardly a cause in the universe that has gotten more wrong than the climate cultists who, for decades, have proffered a wide array of climate catastrophes that require immediate, or near-immediate, actions. Time and again these doomsday scenarios have been proven wrong. These climate cultists have long relied on the deceptive use of data to push their totalitarian agenda. Daily it seems we are subjected to “another global warming fraud.” I suppose everybody needs an Apocalypse—especially totalitarians lusting for power.

Climate science has become such a joke that the “faithful” for years now have been led by a child. However, their dangerous and destructive climate policies are no joke. The left has shown us what they will do when governing in a “crisis.” However, I fear that lockdowns and mask mandates will pale in comparison to what will be called for if the American left’s climate agenda gets the force of U.S. law. We’ve seen how many businesses the left can destroy in the name of controlling a virus; imagine the destruction they can wreak if they control America’s energy policy.

(See this column at American Thinker and Climate Depot.)

Copyright 2020, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America

Thursday, January 28, 2021

CDC/NFL Publish Revealing Wuhan Virus Paper

Multiple outlets have recently reported on a new “scientific paper” published by the CDC in partnership with the NFL. The paper was authored by “medical experts” from both the NFL and the NFL Players Association. The paper details the efforts by the NFL to conduct its season in the midst of the Wuhan virus. As the lockdown narrative—almost always accompanied by the masking narrative—still prevails across much of the U.S., this paper provides some important revelations.

Before discussing the paper, it is important to note that, in spite of a few postponements, every NFL regular season game was played. Only the Super Bowl remains. In other words, unlike the NCAA and thousands of high schools across the U.S. that caved to the foolish Wuhan virus fear porn, every NFL team played every game on its schedule.

Reporting on the CDC/NFL paper, Fox News notes that “from Aug. 9 to Nov. 21 approximately 623,000 COVID-19 tests were performed on approximately 11,400 players and staff members and 329 tested positive (2.9%).” That’s about 55 tests per individual conducted over a 105-day period. (This period constitutes the bulk of the NFL regular season.) That means, on average, these NFL employees were getting tested once every two days.

The 2.9% number is calculated by dividing the number who tested positive (329) by the total number tested (11,400). However, it would be more revealing to note, of the 623,000 tests, how many tests were positive. Almost certainly this number is significantly lower than 2.9%. It’s also important to note that in spite of these “positive” tests, almost zero serious illnesses from the Wuhan virus were reported.

In other words, though the NFL’s rampant testing yielded a few “positives,” virtually no one got sick. ABC News details each team’s “cases” as of early December here. Almost every player or coach who was reported to have missed a game had to do so because of a “positive test.” Thus, as we have seen throughout the past ten months, a “positive test” does not in any way indicate an actual Wuhan virus case. 

Only two NFL employees—Denver’s defensive coordinator Ed Donatell and Jacksonville running back Ryquell Armstead—reportedly had to be hospitalized due to Wuhan virus complications. Both have fully recovered. It seems that for NFL players—and for football players at any level—the dangers from the Wuhan virus pale in comparison to the dangers that come from playing in football games.

Most telling from the CDC/NFL paper was the fact that, according to Dr. Allen Sills, the NFL’s chief medical officer, “We have not seen any evidence of on-field transmission in NFL games or practices.” Dr. Sills added,

I think that that is an important observation. It’s certainly a question that many people raised before we started as to why that occurred. I think there are a number of theories that people have advanced. One of them is that obviously we’re playing either in an open area or at least an extremely large air environment where we’ve got a lot of ventilation, a lot of movement and likely quick dispersal of any droplets or particles.

So in over 256 NFL games (not including playoff games), and for well over 1,000 practices (probably closer to 2,000) involving 32 teams and over 2,000 players, there was zero evidence of “on-field transmission.” This is significant because of what happens during an NFL game or practice.

Undoubtedly, you are somewhat familiar with the game of American football, but just in case you’re not, football is akin to ritualized combat. Every play involves multiple boys or men (depending on the level of competition) engaged in blocking, tackling, pushing, pulling, and so on. What’s more, because this is done over a multiple-hour period while running in full (or, in the case of practice, sometimes partial) pads, this variety of numerous close contacts is done while players are profusely expelling bodily fluids via sweating, spitting, bleeding, and the like.

So after thousands of hours involving hundreds of thousands of extremely close, maskless contacts in which bodily fluids were almost always present, the NFL and the CDC are telling us that there were zero person-to-person transmissions of the Wuhan virus! Don’t tell me this had anything to do with the fact that some players wear face shields (many, if not most, did not—they were not required). In fact, the CDC does not recommend face shields to prevent the spread of the Wuhan virus. 

If, as Dr. Sills suggests, this lack of transmission is due to the fact that NFL games and practices are conducted “in an open area or at least an extremely large air environment where we’ve got a lot of ventilation,” then why in the world would any government official or municipality mandate masks, etc. for outdoor activity?! In fact, given that many NFL games and practices are in large indoor facilities—and given that there was zero person-to-person transmission where rampant close contact was present—why would any mall, church, school, or Walmart, Lowes, Kroger, and the like mandate masks?

Why did the NFL mandate masks on its sidelines? If sweaty, bleeding players engaged in hand-to-hand battles did not spread the virus, why in the world would merely standing on a sideline be any more dangerous?! It’s almost as if the NFL wanted to aid the Democrat Party and perpetuate the lockdown narrative! 

This data from the NFL should again make it clear that, for the young and healthy, the Wuhan virus presents little to no danger. Along with the fact that a mountain of other data has shown that masks and mask mandates do not prevent the spread of the Wuhan virus, this data from the NFL should also put an end to the widespread masking of Americans. This is especially true for the young and any who are asymptomatic.

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2021, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith and Reason.
Trevor is the author of The Miracle and Magnificence of America

Friday, January 15, 2021

What Conservatism Must Conserve

As we stand on the verge of Democrats taking control of the federal government, and as emboldened liberals across media, politics, punditry, and the general population seek to silence and punish conservatives—even going so far as to draft legislation that would criminalize the political rallies of their opponents—it seems a good time to take a step back and remind everyone what exactly conservatism is trying to conserve. Or, for those who need a refresher, what conservatism should be conserving.

Conservatism must conserve the U.S. Constitution. The United States of America is not a democracy. We are a constitutional republic. As the young United States was floundering under the weak Articles of Confederation, Founding Fathers such as Alexander Hamilton and Fisher Ames knew well that in order to “preserve the Union” and to protect liberty, a sound Constitution was required.

Among many other magnificent things, in order to provide for a unique “Union” of a variety of states, the U.S. Constitution represents a brilliant compromise between large states and small states on balanced representation in Congress and the manner in which the U.S. President is chosen. Among many other magnificent things, the Bill of Rights protects religion, speech, assembly, and the right to bear arms. The U.S. Constitution is the world’s most enduring charter of government. In 1878, William Gladstone rightly described our Constitution as “the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.”

Conservatism must conserve law and order. “States are laboratories for democracy,” we are told. Of course, under federalism, this would be the case with local governments as well, especially large cities. The most repeated and verified political experiment in U.S. history is this: via liberalism, or leftism—whatever you want to call it—Democrats have turned American cities into some of the most dangerous, dirty, and lawless places in the world.

Under authoritarianism—the ultimate goal for American leftists—the regime is the law. For American colonists languishing under the British Monarchy, this would be translated as “the King is the law.” As Thomas Paine put it in Common Sense, “In America, the law is king.” And the “supreme Law of the Land” in America is the U.S. Constitution. If the law is ignored, if the Constitution is ignored, chaos reigns—borders are dangerously porous, the police are reviled, buildings are burned (without repercussions!), businesses are looted (without repercussions!), elections are corrupt, and so on.

Conservatism must conserve capitalism. The U.S. has long been the world’s leading economic power. Nothing contrived by man is more responsible for this than capitalism. Likewise, no other economic system the world over has done more to lift people out of poverty than capitalism. As history has clearly demonstrated, no economic system has proven better than the free-market economics touted by Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations.

Published in 1776, The Wealth of Nations would have an almost immediate impact on government financial policy worldwide and is considered by many to be the most important treatise on economics ever written. Smith’s seminal work was enthusiastically embraced by America’s Founding Fathers, and thus capitalism in America was born. Walmart, Ford, Exxon, IBM, CVS, AT&T, Kroger, Amazon, Facebook, Google, and the like all owe their existence to American capitalism. Not one of these companies would exist as they do today without hopeful investors seeking a profitable return—even Jeff Bezos went to such with his hat in his hand—and without customers operating in a free market.

Conservatism must conserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman for life. Again, marriage is the oldest institution in the history of humanity—older than God's covenant with the nation of Israel, older than The Law, older than the church. Marriage is one of the earliest truths revealed by God. If anything is true, marriage as the union of one man and one woman is true. On this, there can never be compromise.

Married mothers and fathers are the foundation of every sound society the world has ever known. No law written by human beings should ever subvert this ancient and foundational institution. President Ronald Reagan summed it up well when he noted, “The family has always been the cornerstone of American society…in the family we learn our first lessons of God and man, love and discipline, rights and responsibilities…the strength of our families is vital to the strength of our nation.”

Conservatism must conserve life. From America’s beginning, it was clear that the “right to life” was considered “unalienable” by America’s Founders. In other words, this right is conferred upon us by our Creator, and any effort to take this away—no matter the stage of life—is a struggle against the One who made us all and His eternal Law.

The plight of the unborn is the greatest civil rights battle of all time. Any person who refuses to protect the most innocent and helpless among us should never be placed in a position of power in any nation, but this should especially be the case in the United States of America.

Above all, conservatism must conserve that we are “one nation under God.” Conservatism must conserve the idea that there is a God who created all things, who is the Author of all life, who is the Lawgiver, the ultimate Arbiter for what is moral, the final Judge, the Savior of all humanity, and the One to whom we owe our ultimate and final allegiance. Because all law is rooted in someone’s idea of what is moral, conservatives must reject the foolish notion that we should not “legislate morality.”

If conservatism seeks to conserve anything, it is those things that have been settled for all time. If conservatism seeks to conserve anything, it is the idea that there is an Author of truth and that the laws of mankind and all good government must be rooted in His Law. If we want our nation to endure as our Founders envisioned it, these things must be conserved.

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2021, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith and Reason.
Trevor is the author of The Miracle and Magnificence of America