Daily Archives: March 12, 2024

(March 8, 2024 / JNS)

Turning points in history arent always obvious or easily recognized by those living through them. But the significance of Oct. 7 and the way the events of that awful day and the terrible reactions to them around the worldare such that few Jews have been unaware that they are living through a crucial moment in the history of their people. The horrific attacks on Jewish communities in southern Israel carried out by Hamas and its Palestinian supporters constituted the largest mass slaughter of Jews since World War II and the Holocaust. The rampage of murder, rape, torture and kidnapping began a war in which Israelis have been forced to defend their homes and families against a genocidal foe. But of perhaps equal significance is the impact this has had on Jews elsewhere, particularly those living in the United States, most of whom had thought of themselves as largely immune from the scourge of Jew-hatred that had been a constant theme of millennia of Jewish history.

The post-Oct. 7 surge of antisemitism has shaken that complacency and created what can only be termed a crisis of faith among secular Jewish liberals unlike anything they have previously encountered. As a cover story in The Atlantic magazine made clear, its not just the mobs on college campuses and in the streets of major cities that chanted for the destruction of Israel (from the river to the sea) and for terrorism against Jews wherever they lived (globalize the intifada) that has rattled American Jewish liberals. Its the realization that the capture of much of the educational system, popular culture and even government by left-wing ideologies is not just aimed at toppling traditional ideas about Western civilization and America; its a direct threat to Jews.

Thats the basic truth at the heart of Franklin Foers gloomy Atlantic essay, The Golden Age of American Jews Is Ending. As a member-in-good standing of the Washington liberal establishment, Foer, currently an Atlantic staff writer and a former editor of The New Republic, as well as the older brother of novelist Jonathan Safran Foer, is well-placed to speak to the collapse of self-confidence on the part of much of American Jewry in recent months. And though he gets some of it wrong in his attempt to place recent events in the context of the last century of American Jewish history and antisemitism, hes certainly right about one thing.

The end of American exceptionalism

The shift in the way many American elites think has created more than just some uncomfortable moments for the large percentage of Jews whose lives are built around their unquestioned place in the life of the nation. Foer credits the widespread acceptance of Jews in virtually every sector of American lifeacademia, business, culture, governmentto the heyday of a particularly inclusive brand of American liberalism that reached its peak in the late 20th century. The replacement of that belief system by the new orthodoxy of critical race theory, intersectionality and the woke catechism of diversity, equity and inclusion not only seeks to change American society for the worse; it marks the end of the very aspects of American exceptionalism that made that golden age for Jews possible.

Nevertheless, though Foer recognizes that Jews like him were wrong to think that antisemitism was primarily a feature of the American right, he is still far too much a product of a partisan mindset to fully recognize what has happened and why. His potted history of the last 100 years of Jewish life on American shores and the rise of antisemitism in the last quarter-century is determined to be evenhanded when it comes to apportioning blame for the current problems of the Jews.

It is this failure to be clear-headed about the problem that is at the root of a pessimistic conclusion about the end of the good times for American Jewry that, though the post-Oct. 7 atmosphere would seem to validate that belief, should not be entirely accepted. Thats because there is a path for preserving Jewish acceptance. But it must be predicated on Jews breaking ranks with their erstwhile allies on the left and not merely expressing resentment at their betrayal, as Foer does.

Instead, it will require a recognition that if liberalism is to be saved, the failure of liberals to defend both Western civilization and the Jews against the intersectional left must be acknowledged. That must be followed by both a full-throated rejection of woke antisemitism and an alliance with conservatives, who are the only force in this country willing or capable of rolling back the leftist tide that is endangering Jewish security. Whether Jewish liberals are capable of either the self-awareness and honesty to confront the truth of their predicament in this matter is doubtful. But the alternatives are something that most Jews are equally unprepared to live with: an acceptance of their status as a despised minority rather than one that is valued or packing their bags to seek a better life elsewhere.

What created the golden age?

Foers misunderstanding about what made the golden age possibleepitomized in his essay by the 1978 prime-time television tribute to Israels 30th birthday at which Barbra Streisand chatted with Golda Meir and then sang Hatikvahis key to his unwillingness to think sensibly about how to defend it. While he sees Jewish acceptance in America as solely the product of mid-20th-century Democratic Party politics, this is a mistake. The immigrant community that came of age in the 1930s and that had seemingly overcome all traditional obstacles to advancement by the dawn of the 21st century (when Sen. Joe Liebermans nomination as Al Gores running mate seemed to elevate Jews to unforeseen heights) was overwhelmingly supportive of the Democrats and political liberalism.

While Jews faced a different set of problems than other ethnic/religious immigrant groups, their ability to prosper in American society was the product of the same process that led to the integration of other communities that had arrived in large numbers from Europe in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Like the others, what the Jews needed was a country where the rule of law was unquestioned, and religious tests were prohibited. American exceptionalism was based on the nations adherence to Western values enshrined in its founding documents about equal opportunity as well as a belief in merit over entitlement based on race. It was those fundamental principles and, contrary to Foer, not Franklin Roosevelts favor or a liberal Supreme Court that banned school prayer, that protected Jews.

And it is precisely the toppling of those principles by the neo-Marxist critical studies movement and the political vanguard that, as Foer admits, has put its heretofore extremist theories into practice throughout American society that created the situation threatening Jews today.

Where Foer particularly fails in his analysis is his inability to see the profound difference between the impact of extremist right-wing haters and the intersectional left, whose rage at Israel and the Jews could no longer be ignored after Oct. 7.

Right-wing antisemitism exists. It has made itself felt in demonstrations like the neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville, Va., in August 2017, whose tiki torches reminded Jews of Adolf Hitlers Nuremberg rallies and online hate. The lone-wolf shootings by right-wingers, such as the murderous attacks on synagogues in Pittsburgh in 2018 and Poway, Calif., in 2019, were tragic and truly frightening.

But attempts to shoehorn a narrative about former President Donald Trump or Republicans enabling these extremists was a partisan smear. Those, like Foer, who treat criticism of leftist billionaire George Soross interventions in American politics particularly his financing of the campaigns of local prosecutors who were not interested in jailing criminalsas antisemitic are dishonest and undermine efforts to combat real Jew-hatred.

The left really does hate Jews

By contrast, the political lefts enshrining of notions about Jews being white oppressors who should be fair game for terror and genocide in Israel, and intimidation and insults in the United States, has been mainstreamed throughout culture, journalism and politics in a way that has never happened with the right-wing variant of antisemitism.

Foer confesses that he thought left-wingers who attacked Israel were not a problem because he assumed that they were the equivalent of liberal Zionists like him who dont like Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or his government. And even now, he is reluctant to accept a definition of antisemitism that rightly includes anti-Zionism.

But as he has realized since Oct. 7, the intersectional left reserves its sympathy for Palestinians who want to destroy Israel and slaughter its people, not well-meaning left-wing Jews who want a two-state solution. And they have no compunction about extending their animus towards the overwhelming majority of Jews who are not willing to renounce Zionism or declare their opposition to the existence of the one Jewish state on the planet. If advocacy for Jewish genocide is no longer unthinkable even on campuses like Harvard, then its clear that there is little room for the kind of self-confident Jewish existence throughout elite institutions or in the public square where liberal Jews thought they were once so much at home.

The progressives who are enabling antisemitism are now a potent force in politics in way that is unthinkable about the right, where the Republicans have become a lockstep pro-Israel party, and philosemitism is baked deep into the political DNA of the evangelicals that liberal Jews fear more than antisemitic members of the left-wing congressional Squad.

Foer discusses the possibility of Jews fleeing to places like Germany for a safer existence, but that shows that hes even more clueless about the situation in Europe. The red-green alliance between the surging population of Islamist immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa, and left-wing elites who agree on targeting the Jews, is particularly potent in Western Europe. Pointedly, Foer doesnt discuss the one place that remains, even after Oct. 7, the most likely and the safest destination for Jews: Israel. There, they can defend themselves and hold their fate in their own hands.

What has happened since Oct. 7 is merely a confirmation of so many other trends in which traditional liberals have proven unable or unwilling to defend the Western canon in academia, the institution of the family against gender indoctrination as well as the principle of equal opportunity against the DEI doctrine that mandates its destruction. So, it is no surprise that they have similarly either abandoned the Jews against those attacking them or shown themselves too weak to oppose them. President Joe Bidens willingness to pander to antisemitic voters in Americas jihad capital in Dearborn, Mich., is merely the most prominent example of this.

Foer also fails to grasp that as dire as the situation may be for Jews, it is not a foregone conclusion that a defense of that golden ageor at least the widespread acceptance of Jewsis doomed to failure. Granted, rolling back the intersectional and woke racist doctrines that have taken hold of so many American institutions and sectors of society, will be a daunting task. But its not impossible.

The progressives long march through U.S. institutions by which they promoted their doctrines was never voted on by the American people, and most oppose it. And the power of the government that enabled it can prohibit it just as easily. In this fight, Jews are not alone. The political right is committed to defeating woke ideology primarily because it is a threat to America and the West. Actions like the banning of DEI in Florida illustrate how the tide can be turned.

Only by winning the fight for the West and American values that liberals have punted on can exceptionalism be restored. But if liberal Jews are to play a role in stopping a movement that is targeting them, then theyll have to overcome their abhorrence of conservatives and finally join the fight opposing the woke left.

Thats something that will be impossible for people like Foer, as well as the legacy organizations like the Anti-Defamation League and American Jewish Committee, which are too committed to their traditional political allies to do what is necessary to defend Jews. What they dont realize is that if they continue to refuse to treat the battle against woke ideology as an existential struggle that should take precedence over every other domestic concern, theyre not just guaranteeing an illiberal future for this country where antisemitism will continue to be mainstreamed. They are also effectively ensuring that the days of America as a safe haven for Jews really are over.

Jonathan S. Tobin is editor-in-chief of JNS (Jewish News Syndicate). Follow him: @jonathans_tobin.

Subscribe to The JNS Daily Syndicate by email and never miss our top stories

By signing up, you agree to receive emails from JNS and allied pro-Israel organizations.

You have read 3 articles this month.

Register to receive full access to JNS.

See the article here:

Why liberals failed in the fight against antisemitism - JNS.org

Dear readers,

Welcome to EU Elections Decoded, your essential guide for staying up to date and receiving exclusive insights about the upcoming EU elections. This is Max Griera, writing from Bucharest. Subscribe here.

In todays edition

Ahead of Renew Europes grand electoral launch on 20 March, Euractiv took a sneak peek at their lead candidates and manifesto, which focuses on competitiveness, defence, and the need to shift from creating new Green legislation to implementing the existing laws and give the industry breathing space.

The several factions composing the liberal group in the European Parliament will gather on 20 March to launch the joint Renew Europe Now platform, including a 10-point electoral programme and a team of three lead candidates to guide them through the elections.

While the liberals have stayed silent on their campaign plans, their joint electoral plan is starting to take shape. And, as their grand electoral launch approaches, Euractiv was briefed by a well-informed source on the Renew manifestos content.

The common points, which bring together the priorities of ALDE, EDP, and Frances Renaissance the most important liberal factions -, outline the general priorities the liberals will follow in the campaign and the upcoming legislative term, such as defence, farmers, rule of law, and the EUs reform.

However, it seems the manifesto will lack specific policy proposals, instead agreeing on the lowest common denominators and leaving some ambiguity for future flexibility on specific files.

The common priorities focus on boosting Europes competitiveness, to face off against competition from China and the US, while looking inward by embracing a Made in Europe strategy. Such a standpoint echoes ALDEs manifesto, reported by Euractiv, which affirms the EUs single market needs to be completed

We advocate for a frictionless single market that ensures an equal and competitive business environment at the EU level, the ALDE draft manifesto states, while criticising the outgoing Commissions management of the internal market.

In doing so, ALDE also casts doubt on the performance of the commissioner in charge of the internal market, Frenchman Thierry Breton, though any mention of a neglected internal market has been ditched from the Renew manifesto, possibly as a result of French pressure.

On the Green Deal, echoing the regulatory pause called for by French President Emmanuel Macron, the manifesto places a strong emphasis on the need to move away from further regulation and ensure that the implementation of Green Deal files does not hamper Europes businesses.

On migration, the liberals have opted to reject the harsher stance of the European Peoples Party and embrace a humane, clear, and stable approach. However, the manifesto seems to play on ambiguity by broadly calling to help the countries of departure to handle migration flows, as well as further migrant talent integration.

Among other points, the manifesto also brings back Europes reform debate by demanding to reopen the EU treaties to get rid of qualified majority voting, and turn the Commission into a proper democratic government.

Such a perspective likely draws on the manifesto of the European Democratic Party, a member of Renew, seen by Euractiv, which contains 300 actions to be taken after the EU elections.

With a strong pro-European narrative, the EDP manifesto proposes implementing the conclusions of the long-forgotten Conference on the Future of Europe, and the direct election of an EU president with transnational lists.

Just like the Socialists and the centre-right parties, the liberals have also embraced the pro-farmers rhetoric as their own, echoing the pledges that the Renew Europe groups president, Frances Valrie Hayer, made after being elected the groups chief.

Brussels is also waiting to see who will head the Renew Europe Platform in the campaign, as the liberals are the last EU political force to make their pick.

As reported by Euractiv on Tuesday (7 March), the liberals have now confirmed they will have a Team Europe composed of three Spitzenkandidaten to represent each liberal faction: ALDE, EDP, and Frances Renaissance.

What we know so far is that MEP Sandro Gozi will almost certainly become the lead candidate from EDP, while Commissioner Breton seems to be the frontrunner to represent Frances Renaissance.

ALDE members have been struggling to find their pick and have pushed their deadline, initially set last week, to reach an internal agreement.

While ALDE members would like to see Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas as their lead candidate, it is unclear whether she will agree. Read more on the liberals lead candidate team here.

The European Peoples Party congress in Bucharest has elected Ursula von der Leyen as the lead candidate, who has now shifted to campaign mode. The Congress also approved the EPPs electoral manifesto, which shapes the partys policy priorities for the coming five years. Here are some bits Nick Alipour and I gathered on the ground.

Security first. The EPP has included security and order as a core tenet of their manifesto and already applied it in practice during the congress. Upon arriving at the airport, congress attendees received a spooky notice explaining what to do and not to do- to stay safe in Bucharest. The party even set a special password to give in case you found yourself calling 112.

Dissent and von der Leyen scepticism. The Austrian delegation announced they would not vote in favour of the manifesto as it is opposed their views on energy and Schengen, while Frances Les Republicains decided not to vote in favour of von der Leyen, arguing that she does not represent well the party values: Many colleagues, and a substantial number, in fact, including German colleagues, () have thanked us for being the spokesperson for their own reservations, an official from Les Republicains told us. Read more.

Melonis party joining EPP? While von der Leyen has pondered the idea of some members of the nationalist ECR group joining the EPP, Italys centre-right MEP Salvatore De Meo told us that his party, Forza Italia, wants Giorgia Melonis party Fratelli dItalia with whom they currently govern to join the EPP. Read more.

Migration controversy. The manifesto promises a crackdown on migration by endorsing the UKs controversial Rwanda model to send migrants to third countries while processing asylum applications, which von der Leyen endorses fully, she said in a press conference. The UKs scheme with Rwanda, announced by British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, was deemed to conflict with international law by the UKs Supreme Court.

Romania to be rewarded with significant Commission portfolio. Romanian EPP Vice-President Sigfried Muresan told Euractiv that his country will be rewarded for their pro-Europeanness with a portfolio in the areas of foreign affairs, defence, or enlargement. However, it is unclear whether Romanias commissioner will be nominated by the socialists or the centre-right, as they are governing together in a grand coalition.

Romanias opposition stages campaign. The Romanian liberal party USR staged a PR campaign across Bucharest, criticising the centre-right party PNL for having allied with the socialist PSD to govern. USR demands that EPP delegates in Bucharest clarify with PNL leaders how they jumped on the S&D ballot. We are witnessing a festival of the absurd: people who vote PNL will actually send social democrats to the European Parliament, said Ionu Moteanu, USR vice-president and spokesperson.

Ahead of EU elections, security is the magic word for the socialists. Citizens want more security in Europe no, its not von der Leyens latest pitch but what came out of the latest European Socialist Party congress in Rome. Eleonora Vasques has more here.

French left party LFI unveils EU election list, and its all about the perfect balance between new and old faces. The list is still incompletetwo spots are still vacantand needs to be approved by 15 March. Read Clara Bauer-Babef and Paul Messads full coverage here.

Greeces data watchdog investigates MEPs mass emails to voters abroad. The issue has sparked an intense debate in Greece, considering that postal voting will be applied for the first time in the EU elections in June. Sarantis Michalopoulos has you covered.

Breton, Hayer, Kallas, Gozi Where are the liberals leaders? While the electoral battle has already started, Renew Europe still hasnt taken the field. Internal discussions, hesitations, infighting, and contradictions noticed by Euractiv in recent weeks, surely show one thing: All bets are open. Max Griera has more insights.

French far-right: EU elections referendum against migrants, Brussels authoritarianism. France is back, Europe lives again. The Rassemblement Nationals lead candidate Jordan Bardella is ready to cooperate with fellow far-right and nationalist leaders to change the Union from within, setting aside the old Frexit dream. Alice Taylor covered the story.

*Additional reporting by Nick Alipour.

[Edited by Zoran Radosavljevic]

Excerpt from:

Liberal Renew manifesto sneak peek and bits from Bucharest congress - EURACTIV

U.S. Sen. Katie Britt (R-Montgomery) appeared on "Fox News Sunday" with host Shannon Bream Sunday and answered a question many have asked.

Bream asked if Britt was trying to relate the story of a woman she met at the border to something that happened under the Biden administration. The woman, Karla Jacinto Romero, was sex trafficked by Mexican cartels when she was 12 years old.

Britt told Bream what she said was clear.

"I very clearly said I spoke to a woman who told me about when she was trafficked when she was 12," Britt said. "So I didn't say a teenager; I didn't say a young woman, a grown woman, a woman when she was trafficked when she was 12."

During her first 100 days in office, Britt said she visited the border three times and spoke with people and border patrol agents about what was going on. She said she wanted to find out what they thought should be done to prevent similar incidents. She compared her first 100 days to President Joe Biden's first 100 days when he put in place 94 executive actions allowing more border crossings.

"Minutes after coming into office, he stopped all deportations," she explained. "He halted construction of the border wall, and he said I am going to give amnesty to millions. Those types of things act as a magnet to have more and more people here."

Britt said she hopes the story can bring light to human trafficking and crimes being committed by drug cartels coming across the border.

"The truth is and the media knows this, yet they're not covering it that human trafficking has gone up under President Biden," said Britt. "If you look back under 2018, it was a $500 million industry, human trafficking by the drug cartels. It is now a $13 billion industry."

RELATED: Left-wing TikToker Jonathan Katz downplays seriousness of human trafficking in Katie Britt hit piece

"Shannon, the drug cartels are winning under this," she continued. "This is a story of what is happening now at an astronomical rate. And we have to bring attention to it. We have to tell those stories. And the liberal media needs to pay attention to it because there are victims all the way coming to the border. There are victims at the border. And then there are victims all throughout our country and to me, it is disgusting to try to silence the voice of telling the story of what it is like to be sex trafficked when we know that that is one of the things that the drug cartels are profiting most off of."

Another issue brought up about Britt's response is the fact she was sitting at a kitchen table. Britt addressed that by saying it wasn't to make a point that Republicans don't care about women and their issues.

SEE ALSO: Watch: SNL's entirely predictable cold open mocking Katie Britt

"I think the exact opposite is true and that is exactly why I was sitting at a kitchen table," said Britt. "Republicans care about kitchen table issues. We care about faith, family, we care about freedom. We are the ones talking about the economy and the real effects of that while Joe Biden is claiming that Bidenomics is working. We know that gas is higher. We know that he's making us energy-dependent on others, which is not only hurting us at home, it's actually hurting our allies abroad."

"We know that when we go to the grocery store that things cost more," she continued. "I mean, we know that the credit card debt in this nation right now is at an all-time high, over a trillion dollars. It's the highest ever in our nation's history. We know when people are looking to buy a home for their family that mortgage rates are up.

"And so, we are talking about the issues that women care about."

To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email erica.thomas@1819news.com.

Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.

Go here to read the rest:

Katie Britt calls on liberal media 'to pay attention' to border - 1819 News

An injury accident occurred on Saturday at approximately 10:25 pm at the junction of US-83 and US-64, approximately two and one-half miles north of Turpin, OK in Beaver County.

A 2010 Chevy Cobalt being driven by Luis Gustavo Hernandez, age 23 of Liberal, KS, was west bound on US-64. While a 2013 Ram 1500 driven by Luis Alberto Sanchez, age 33 of Liberal, was northbound on US-83. Hernandez failed to stop at a stop sign and struck the Sanchez vehicle. Sanchez departed the roadway to the left and rolled one complete time, coming to rest on its wheels. Hernandez was transported by Seward County EMS to Southwest Medical Center in Liberal, KS. He was admitted in stable condition with head and trunk internal injuries. He was later transferred to Wesley Medical Center in Wichita, KS.

Sanchez transported by Beaver County EMS to Southwest Medical Center in Liberal, KS. He was treated and released.

A Passenger in the Sanchez vehicle, Miguel Angel Tobon, age 29 of Liberal was Not Injured.

See the article here:

Liberal Man Injured in Beaver County Accident - KSCB News.net

News Home

Monday, March 11, 2024 02:04 PM | InvestorsObserver Analysts

The market has been down on China Liberal Education Holdings Ltd (CLEU) stock recently. CLEU gets a Bearish score from InvestorsObserver Stock Sentiment Indicator.

Subscribe to our daily morning update newsletter and never miss out on the need-to-know market news, movements, and more.

Thank you for signing up! You're all set to receive the Morning Update newsletter

Monday, March 11, 2024 04:02 PM | InvestorsObserver Analysts

Monday, March 11, 2024 04:02 PM | InvestorsObserver Analysts

Monday, March 11, 2024 03:57 PM | InvestorsObserver Analysts

Monday, March 11, 2024 03:50 PM | InvestorsObserver Analysts

Monday, March 11, 2024 03:44 PM | InvestorsObserver Analysts

Monday, March 11, 2024 03:42 PM | InvestorsObserver Analysts

Monday, March 11, 2024 04:02 PM | InvestorsObserver Analysts

Monday, March 11, 2024 04:02 PM | InvestorsObserver Analysts

Monday, March 11, 2024 03:57 PM | InvestorsObserver Analysts

Monday, March 11, 2024 03:50 PM | InvestorsObserver Analysts

Monday, March 11, 2024 03:44 PM | InvestorsObserver Analysts

Monday, March 11, 2024 03:42 PM | InvestorsObserver Analysts

Read more:

What is the Market's View on China Liberal Education Holdings Ltd (CLEU) Stock's Price and Volume Trends Monday? - InvestorsObserver

The European liberals three-person lead candidate team will include the German defence policy expert Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann on behalf of ALDE, her party has announced.

From 6 to 9 June, Europeans are heading to the polls to elect a new European Parliament. The liberal centrist Renew Europe group in the European Parliament will send three candidates into the race, one for each party belonging to the group.

While the ALDE party, the European Democratic Party (EDP), and Emmanuel Macrons Renaissance party will run on a common election platform and a joint party programme, each will have their own lead candidate.

Germanys liberals, the business-friendly FDP, will represent ALDE in the lead candidate team through the 66-year-old defence policy expert Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann.

We will put her forward alongside thirteen other ALDE parties, FDP party chief Christian Lindner said in Berlin on Monday (11 March). Strack-Zimmermann will be officially confirmed at the partys congress on 20 March.

Sources familiar with the matter say she amounted to a second choice after the liberals big names like Estonian PM Kaja Kallas and Luxembourgs former prime minister Xavier Bettel bowed out.

The lead candidates of the three liberal parties will be formally announced on 20 March, when Renew Europe formally kicks off its election campaign. Alongside the official confirmation of the three top candidates, Renew Europe will also pass its joint election programme, which was leaked to Euractiv last week.

ALDE itself will adopt its own party programme shortly before the congress.

Strack-Zimmermann outlined three priorities in Berlin: defence, bureaucracy, and the rule of law.

The expert, who chairs the Bundestags defence committee, said European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had not sufficiently prioritised defence issues, despite her long previous tenure as the German minister of defence, and failed to plan for a second Trump administration in the US.

Instead, von der Leyen had focused on the Green Deal, run by then-Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans, adding a bureaucratic burden, Strack-Zimmermann said, explaining that the proposed supply chain law, for example, would have obliged coffee importers to ensure that every bean is free from forced labour.

On the rule of law, she stressed that Europe is a union of values and rule of law is a value in and of itself.

EU countries like Hungary, with a record of democratic backsliding, have to expect that we take away their voting rights, as the treaties allow, she stressed a procedure outlined in Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union in case a country seriously and persistently breaches the principles on which the EU is founded.

The vocal politician her party has made Combative in Europe their slogan can be expected to make an impact in Brussels, where politicians tend to be more soft-spoken and ready to compromise.

But she had a message for Berlin, too: I am not gone, even when I am gone.

[Edited by Zoran Radosavljevic/Oliver Noyan]

Read the rest here:

German liberals send defence expert into tripartite EU election leadership team - EURACTIV

Christ gave His disciples the Divine Commission to go and teach all nations, baptizing them. Christians are called to change societyall society, every society. They pursue this goal with charity and zeal, respecting the free will of individuals. Wherever Christianity has gone, its charity has transformed nations and peoples.

Whenever the extreme left is in trouble, it labels the other side as extremists. One such label is Christian nationalism.

The term is now being used to mischaracterize the Christian right. Its meaning is so elastic that it can be used to suit any occasion. It is vague enough to include any Christian engaged in the culture war. It has just enough punch to insinuate a threatening agenda.

Recently, the term made headlines again, being trotted out by those who foresee the danger of an imagined theocracy of Christian supremacists who would govern America based on the Bible.

Alabamas Tom Parker Opinion

Chief Justice Tom Parker triggered the new attack with his concurring opinion on the recent 81 Alabama Supreme Court decision on embryo personhood. The outspoken Methodist chief justice supported his opinion by citing God, Scripture, Saint Augustine, Saint Thomas Aquinas, and others.

The February 16 decision was enough to unleash outrage from leftists and moderates. Washington Post associate editor Ruth Marcus penned a column titled: Welcome to the Theocracy. The more moderate New York Times columnist David French immediately attacked the opinion as an ominous development.

Mr. French said he had no problems with people being Christian or even bringing their beliefs to the public square. However, they must not advocate deference to Christianity in the body politic. Christians should not seek to return America to its Christian roots, even if done through logical and gentle persuasion.

A Vague Religion Is Ideal

Mr. Frenchs attitude recalls the comment of the late Sen. Eugene McCarthy, who once said there are only two kinds of religion that are permitted in America: strong beliefs that are vaguely expressed, or vague beliefs that are strongly expressed.

These liberals think Christians should be free to believe what they want, as long as keep it vague and ineffective. They can strongly desire their salvation but not make it a program for everyone else.

Mr. Frenchs main criticism of strongly-believed, strongly-expressed Christianity is that it turns into Christian identity politics. Christians end up wanting to change all society and convert the world. Imagine that.

The Seven Mountain Mandate

He joins many others who are critical of Justice Parkers support for the Seven Mountain Mandate promoted by the Pentacostalist dominionist movement. This mandate holds that Christians should get out of the prayer closet and seek to exert dominion in seven key societal institutions: the family, the church, education, the media, the arts, business, and government.

Liberals consider this desire to take back the culture intolerable since any Christian domination would reduce non-Christians to second-class citizens. These liberals call for more than a separation of church and state. They demand separation of church and culture.

If these liberals had their way, Christians would be fated to lose the culture war since all religion would then be reduced to a personal feel-good thing for the weak of charactera typical liberal characterization. Ultimately, that is what liberals want.

The Nature of Christianity

There are two things wrong with these recent criticisms of left-labeled Christian nationalism.

The first involves a gross misunderstanding of the nature of Christianity itself.

Christianity is an identity religion. By Baptism, the person is reborn in Christ and ontologically changed. The person and the Christian form a single unity. Christianity is not a pastime, a hobby, or an interest. It is part of who one is. This Christianity manifests itself in all that Christians doin all (seven) fields.

Christianity is also, by its nature, expansive. Joyful Christians tend to spread the good news of the Gospel to everyone so that others might also share in their joy.

Indeed, Christ gave His disciples the Divine Commission to go and teach all nations, baptizing them. Christians are called to change societyall society, every society. They pursue this goal with charity and zeal, respecting the free will of individuals. Wherever Christianity has gone, its charity has transformed nations and peoples.

Christians are also called to denounce sin and injustice. They cannot remain silent in the face of iniquity. Thus, Christians create conditions favorable to the practice of the Faith and the benefit of all society, not just its Christian portion. They oppose sins and obstacles that prevent the practice of virtue.

Changing Society for the Better

Faithful Christians change society for the better. They will necessarily influence the seven key societal institutions and seek to change them. They have always zealously done so. To ask them to do the contrary is to ask them to stop being real Christians.

Indeed, American history has long reflected this dominant Christian influence in the public forum. For example, with English jurists Sir William Blackstone (17231780) and Sir Edward Coke (15521634), religious references in the nations legal tradition date back to colonial times. The Christian influence in the other Seven Mountain domains is undeniable in the countrys birth and development.

Thats why Christians must affirm their Faith strongly and unapologetically. If they follow the liberals advice to practice a vague and toned-down Christianity, the result will be skin-deep Christians unable and unwilling to defend what they believe. The Church will become a sentimental collection of souls seeking feel-good spiritual experiences, not Faith. All will be reduced to selfish individuals who do not care about the good of their neighbors or truly love God. This policy would make all things liberaleven Christianity.

The Double Standards of Liberalism

The second problem with those now criticizing what they label Christian nationalism is that they do not subject their own avowed ideologyliberalismto the same rigid standards of irrelevancy.

A simplified definition of liberalism is an ideology that demands the right to feel, think and do whatever the unbridled passions desire. Liberalism has other elements that define it, but it always results in removing the restraints that Christian civilization imposes on these passions.

Over the decades, liberalism has eroded the Christian values that keep order in society by doing exactly what it accuses sincere Christians of wanting to doinfluencing and dominating societal institutions. It is just one more example of liberals egregious projection. However, there is a difference. Those who subscribe to liberalism impose their agenda on society. They do not propose it.

Liberal Tyranny

Those who uphold the ideology of liberalism make no effort to express their strongly held beliefs vaguely. They have established themselves well inside and dominate the seven key societal institutions. There is no concern for the Christians who rightly complain of being reduced to second-class citizens at school board meetings and library hearings.

Liberal tyranny has now reached a postliberal phase where even the will of the democratic majority must be sacrificed on the altar of wokeness and identity politics. Institutions, such as schools, must accommodate the outlandish behavior of anyone who identifies as something else and demands rights. Companies like Bud Lights Anheuser-Busch will opt to lose $1.4 billion rather than apologize to its vast consumer base for the single comment of Dylan Mulvaneys promotion of transgender activism.

Christians have no choice but to defend moral principles and challenge these disordered acts that undermine the common good. This is not a theocracy but a return to those perennial principles that undergird the Christian order.

This is not Christian nationalism but Christians fighting for the common goodor better, affirming that there is an objective good and an objective evil. They affirm the reality of a loving God who exists despite the absurd denials from liberals. They strive to uphold standards of morality and decency in a world that glorifies the contrary.

Mr. Frenchs call for a vaguely held Christianity is consistent with his demand that everyone take a seat at his postliberal table, including the porno-drag queens whose indecent story hours he so passionately defends.

Indeed, it is not Christians who are creating theocracies but liberals like Mr. French and Ruth Marcus who build and defend the dictatorship of relativism and imagine caricatures of what they suppose a Christian order to be. These imaginings would mimic the liberal tyranny now imposed upon the nation since liberals can only think in terms of their own power structures bereft of Christian charity, virtue, or grace. These liberal fantasies are unchristian.

The Breakdown of an Order

Meanwhile, the liberal order is breaking down as the last moral restraints are discarded. A new postmodern disorder is rising that breaks all the old rules of engagement.

In the face of evermore radical moral outrages, reacting Christians are supposed to pretend they do not see the results of the broken families, shattered communities, and empty churches that litter the social landscape.

This new postliberal disorder would destroy all existing narratives that order society. It would be a phantasmagoric meeting place of clashing wills and passions. It will lead to a postmodernity described by Czech poet Vclav Havel, where everything is possible and nothing is certain.

Americans act well when striving in every way they can for the opposite: a Christian America that trusts in God.

The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politicswe approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please considerdonating now.

The featured image is Christ with his disciples (2016) by A.N. Mironov. This file is licensed under theCreative CommonsAttribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

Read the original:

Liberals and the Libel of Christian Nationalism - The Imaginative Conservative

The Liberal Arts & Science Academy - Austin Raptors waltzed into their game on Wednesday with 13 straight wins but they left with 14. Their defense stepped up to hand Navarro a 5-0 shutout. Considering Liberal Arts & Science Academy - Austin has won nine matchups by more than two goals this season, Wednesday's blowout was nothing new.

Liberal Arts & Science Academy - Austin pushed their record up to 15-1-2 with that win, which was their seventh straight at home. Those good results were due in large part to their offensive performance across that stretch, as they scored 30 goals over those seven matches. As for Navarro, they are on a four-game losing streak that has dropped them down to 4-10-5.

Liberal Arts & Science Academy - Austin does not have any more games scheduled as of now. As for Navarro, they didn't take long to hit the pitch again: they've already played their next match, a 3-0 defeat vs. Northeast Early College on the 8th.

Article generated by infoSentience based on data entered on MaxPreps

Follow this link:

Liberal Arts & Science Academy - Austin extends home winning streak to seven - MaxPreps

Presidential candidate Joe Biden stirred up controversy during the 2020 campaign, when, in an interview with a black radio host, he said: If you have a problem figuring out if youre for me or Trump, you aint black.

Biden got pushback on this, but he captured a pretty common view among liberals: that liberalism is genetically emblazoned in black DNA.

They see blacks who are not liberal as not normal, not really black.

As a black woman and a conservative for many years, I can testify to the prevalence of this view.

Now the liberal media is getting into a new version of this. Same story, but slightly different version.

The big scoop is that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has hired as one of his clerks a young woman who has been accused of racism.

Crystal Clanton, a magna cum laude graduate of Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University who most recently was a clerk for highly respected conservative Judge William Pryor on the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, was just hired by Thomas.

Clanton, according to liberal accusers, posted remarks back in 2015, while working at Turning Point USA, saying, I hate black peoplealong with some profanity accompanying the statement.

Far-left journalists, such as Ruth Marcus of The Washington Post, and Jane Mayer of The New Yorker, have been on the story for years. Mayer first reported about it in 2017.

This despite no definitive evidence that the racist post was the work of Clanton.

Now that Thomas has hired Clanton, liberals have shifted into high gear.

With all the supposed concerns of the Left about racism, none seem troubled or confused by the allegation that a black judgeno less the most prominent black jurist in the nationwould hire a racist.

How does that compute?

The answer is that in liberal eyes, black conservatives aint black.

Certainly, a black conservative as sophisticated as Thomas could in no way be black.

And therefore, he could even be a racist and sympathetic to racists.

Absurd? Of course. Is it demeaning and insulting to Thomas? Of course.

Liberals are not only very tolerant of sloppy thinking. They are also tolerant of sloppy journalism.

Mayers latest coverage of Clanton, which she first reported in the New Yorker in 2017, appears under the headline The Scandal of Clarence Thomass New Clerk.

What is the scandal? Thomas has hired Clanton, who became notorious in 2015 for apparently sending texts that said, I hate black people

Apparently is enough for Mayer and her liberal compatriots to convict.

When Pryor hired Clanton, who had a previous clerkship with Judge Corey Maze in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, seven congressional Democrats called for an investigation. An investigation was conducted by Chief Judge Debra Ann Livingston of the 2nd Circuit.

The end of Livingstons investigation of the incident was a green light for Clanton.

Livingston pointed out that both Maze and Pryor knew of the allegations when they hired her, rejected their validity, and found her to be highly competent.

As part of the 2nd Circuit investigation, Thomas sent a letter saying, I know Crystal Clanton and I know bigotry. Bigotry is antithetical to her nature.

Thomas and his wife, Ginni, have known Clanton for years. Clanton actually lived with them for almost a year.

If she was a racist, how could Thomas not know it?

Yet despite this, liberal journalists continue on about Thomas hiring a racist as his clerk.

When will we realize that the real racism belongs to liberals who see every black American as a liberal mannequin, denying their uniqueness, integrity, and individuality? When will we realize the disservice to black Americans and all Americans in denying the humanity of black Americans who are conservative?

(C) 2024 CREATORS.COM

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please emailletters@DailySignal.com,and well consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular We Hear You feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

Original post:

Liberal Racism and the Denigration of Black Conservatives - Daily Signal