Skip to main content

In 1936 Dawson Predicts: Obama's Totalitarian State of Free Milk and Birth Control

In 1936 Christopher Dawson predicted Obama's totalitarian (Obamacare) state of free milk and birth control.

My question is if Romney was the forrunner (Romneycare) of totalitarian state of free milk and birth control, why should I trust or vote for him?

At this time, it is more important to witness to truth and pray. Jesus is saving us and may save this country, but only if get on our knees and ask.

Fred


-“It may be harder to resist a Totalitarian state which relies on free
milk and birth control clinics than one which relies on castor oil and
concentration camps.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/liberal-fascism/about/praise.p?page=13

Bradley Birzer’s book on Christopher Dawson: “Sanctifying the World”.

On p.124, Birzer discusses Dawson’s book, “Religion and the Modern
State” (1936):

Dawson “described the rise of fascism while labeling the rise of the
New Deal in America as a benign form of dictatorship. ‘It is in fact
a constitutional dictatorship,’ Dawson wrote bluntly. Further, he
noted, to abandon the free market, as the Americans had done, would
lead to the abandonment of other American liberties. ‘We shall also
have to abandon political individualism and the right to criticize and
oppose the Government,’ Dawson wrote. Rooted in the Burkean
tradition of organic common law and constitutional medievalism, Dawson
believed that all liberties were wrapped together, inseparable from
one another….mass democracies more often than not allow bureaucracies and selfish
interests to assume control, forcing all things to become political
and politicized…”

Check out this quote especially, which might have come from your own
pen:


“It may be harder to resist a Totalitarian state which relies on free
milk and birth control clinics than one which relies on castor oil and
concentration camps.”

Believing in wrecks as a matter of principle
Bruce W. Green - Guest Columnist - 4/3/2009 9:00:00 AM

I admit to being no more impressed these days with Republicans than with Democrats. Ideologies, like addictive drugs, seem to have disintegrated any trace of commendable statesmanship from the makeup of modern politicians.





It may be that America's leaders in recent years — the Republicans — allowed greed to flourish and mortgaged the nation's future at the expense of the common good, but, in the words of Christopher Dawson "[t]he fact that we have lost confidence in the ship's officers is no reason for entrusting its navigation to people who believe in wrecks as a matter of principle or who make a business of piracy." [1]

Whatever may have been the case with the former ship's officers, America now shows signs of embracing an imminent and superficially benign form of dictatorship. [2] The country's new administration is discarding the free market with shocking speed, assisting bureaucracies to assume control of private business, politicizing the economy, and facilitating the further breakdown of traditional morality. Soon, American culture may have changed in a fashion so drastic as to be no longer recognizable as American or cultured. And it will have done so, to all appearances, under a benevolent, benign dictatorship which, perhaps sincerely, believes in wrecks as a matter of principle.

Admittedly, the majority of American people seem not to protest too much about the evolving cradle-to-grave welfare state. As Dawson noted, however, "[i]t may be harder to resist a Totalitarian state which relies on free milk and birth-control clinics than one which relies on castor oil and concentration camps." [3] But, totalitarian results, however brought about, are ultimately dehumanizing.

Perhaps it must be candidly admitted that the country has begun an irreversible process of inevitable decay. In such an ideological context, it is easy for people of principle, and particularly people of Christian faith, to feel lost. But, what can be done?

First, we must be enduringly patient. It will take quite some time before most can see that the new order professes humanitarian principles while at the same time refusing to tolerate any true individuality or dissent from materialist ideals. We must resist the temptation to exchange one ideology for another, to grasp for quick cures, or to believe that our current decline may be remedied solely by political means. America is very ill; she is not just temporarily under the control of the wrong political ideology. It will take time, self-control, fortitude, and moral virtue to return to a higher form of government and civilization.

Second, we must do what is in our power to challenge the reigning system of values and to witness to truth in a culture approaching the final stages of dehumanization. Despite our natural tendency to recoil from dehumanizing influences, we must not withdraw from the time and place in which we have been born. We must not attempt to isolate ourselves from the unpleasantness of cultural decay by constructing a private world in harmony with our political, moral, or religious convictions. Witnessing to truth is the duty and burden of a free people.

Ordered liberty is our hope for the future. Liberty must be earned, and sometimes it must be re-earned. This begins with the revitalization of subsidiary institutions like the family, church, and local communities. These institutions humanize us and help us resist dehumanization. While we must never forget Washington, we must refuse to accept the idea that it is ultimate reality.



References:

[1] Christopher Dawson, "The Modern Dilemma," Cambridge Review, February 17, 1933, 10.
[2] In 1936 Dawson called Roosevelt's New Deal "a constitutional dictatorship", which he might find benign indeed when compared with its impending modern form. See Christopher Dawson, Religion and the Modern State (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1936), 23.
[3] Id., 108.






Bruce W. Green (bwg@consolidated.net) is an attorney in Texas and founding dean of the Liberty University School of Law. This column is printed with permission.



Opinions expressed in 'Perspectives' columns published by OneNewsNow.com are the sole responsibility of the article's author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of the staff or management of, or advertisers who support the American Family News Network, OneNewsNow.com, our parent organization or its other affiliates

[http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=476454]

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...