Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: He Would be Canceled in Today’s America

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in February 1974. Credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008) was one of the greatest literary and political figures of the 20th Century. For the first 25 years of his life, Solzhenitsyn was an ardent supporter of Vladimir Lenin’s Soviet Revolution. In fact, by 1938 Solzhenitsyn’s enthusiasm for Communism had grown to the point of obsession. As a youth, Solzhenitsyn even declared, “I would gladly give my life for Lenin.”[1]

This article documents how Solzhenitsyn eventually became an outspoken critic of Soviet Communism, as well as his conclusion that Jews were primarily responsible for the Bolshevik Revolution.

Early Years

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was born into an environment of chaos and suffering that rivaled anything he experienced in his later life. His young father died six months before his birth in excruciating pain from wounds received in a hunting accident. His grief-stricken mother rejoined her family in a nearby summer resort, only to find herself in the middle of a vicious battle then raging between Reds and Whites in Russia’s Civil War. Lenin and his band of Bolsheviks were fighting ferociously to consolidate their power, and the whole of Russia was awash in blood.[2]

Solzhenitsyn’s youth was one of hardship, privation and poverty. For the first 23 years of his life, Solzhenitsyn did not know the inside of a house; he lived in huts with no running water. These huts were constantly assailed by the cold, and there was never enough fuel to keep him warm. Food shortages were common, and after the starvation of the 1930s, ordinary food shortages were only a minor problem. Solzhenitsyn regarded all of these hardships as normal, since the poverty and hunger he experienced as a youth were widespread in the Soviet Union.[3]

Solzhenitsyn at the Age of 12 joined the Young Pioneers, which was the junior auxiliary of the Communist Party’s youth movement, the Komsomol. Like most of his friends, Solzhenitsyn passed automatically from the Young Pioneers to the Komsomol in his 10th and final year at school. Earnest and intense by nature, Solzhenitsyn studied Marxism-Leninism with an enthusiasm and energy typical of his eager spirit. He later wrote about his interest in Communist Party doctrine: “I was absolutely sincerely enthralled by it over a period of several years.” Solzhenitsyn became a Marxist, a Leninist and a Communist.[4]

Despite his interest in literature, Solzhenitsyn chose to study physics and mathematics when he entered Rostov State University. His secret ambition had been to go to Moscow and study literature. However, concern for his mother, who was suffering from tuberculosis and in very poor health, held him back. Solzhenitsyn was an outstanding student at the university, receiving top marks in all his examinations. He was awarded during his last year at the university one of the newly created Stalin scholarships for outstanding achievement. This scholarship carried a stipend two-and-a-half times greater than the usual grant.[5]

Solzhenitsyn seemed on the threshold of a brilliant career. As an outstanding student in physics and mathematics, he could look forward to the pick of the best jobs available. However, he opted for the modest post of a village schoolteacher, turning down the higher-paying jobs and glittering prizes that were within his reach. Bursting with enthusiasm and, above all, great literary talent, Solzhenitsyn was determined to pursue his dream of becoming a published writer.[6]

War Service 

Shortly after Germany invaded the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, Solzhenitsyn attempted to enlist in the Soviet military. However, his medical examination resulted in a classification of “limited fitness” due to an abdominal disability, the result of a groin disorder in infancy that had gone undetected. While his friends marched to war, Solzhenitsyn was dispatched to the Cossack settlement of Morozovsk to work as a school teacher.[7]

By mid-October 1941, Moscow was threatened and the German advance seemed irresistible. Under these dire circumstances, all classifications of fitness were cast aside and Solzhenitsyn was drafted into the Soviet Army. Solzhenitsyn spent a half-year as a downtrodden soldier before being accepted into officer training school. He disliked officer training, saying “they trained us like young beasts so as to infuriate us to the point where we would later want to take it out on someone else.” However, Solzhenitsyn completed officer training and was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant in October 1942. He reached the rank of captain in June 1944.[8]

Solzhenitsyn experienced his first combat in the summer of 1943 in battles at Kursk and Orel. He was awarded the Order of the Patriotic War, second class, for his part in the battle at Orel. Solzhenitsyn in 1944 found himself in the middle of some of the bloodiest battles on Germany’s eastern front. Inexorably, the Soviet Army advanced until it triumphantly crossed the Polish border. Solzhenitsyn was aghast at the brutalities the Soviet Army committed against captured Soviet citizens who had chosen to fight for the Germans. Experience was slowly making Solzhenitsyn question the Soviet communist system he had embraced as a youth.[9]

Solzhenitsyn also abhorred the violence and atrocities committed by the Soviet Army when it reached Germany. In a hate-filled address, Stalin had told the Soviet troops to wreak vengeance on Germans for all that Russia had suffered during the war. Rape, pillage and plunder were all condoned by Stalin. Repelled by Stalin’s incitement to greed and cruelty, Solzhenitsyn lectured his men on the need to exercise moderation and restraint. However, Solzhenitsyn’s words fell on deaf ears. As the Soviet Army marched into Germany, it was Stalin’s vision that became reality.[10]

Solzhenitsyn described the entry of his regiment into East Prussia in January 1945: “For three weeks the war had been going on inside Germany and all of us knew very well that if the girls were German they could be raped and then shot. This was almost a combat distinction.”[11] Solzhenitsyn was a committed opponent of such atrocities, and vocally opposed the rape of German women.

Solzhenitsyn’s fortunes took a catastrophic turn when he received a telephone call from brigade headquarters on February 9, 1945. He was ordered to report at once to the brigadier-general’s office. Solzhenitsyn was arrested and sent to prison for derogatory comments he had made about Stalin in correspondence to a friend. He later said his arrest was a defining moment in his life, which was crucial “because it allowed me to understand Soviet reality in its entirety and not merely the one-sided view I had of it previous to the arrest.”[12] Solzhenitsyn became an outspoken opponent of Marxism after his imprisonment in the Soviet Gulag.[13]


Solzhenitsyn was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment and sent in August 1945 to Butyrka Prison in Moscow. He was soon transferred to the Krasnaya Presnya transit prison in Moscow, which was in the heart of the Soviet prison system. On August 14, 1945, Solzhenitsyn and 60 other political prisoners were transferred to Novy Ierusalim (New Jerusalem) 30 miles west of Moscow. It was at New Jerusalem that Solzhenitsyn got his first bitter taste of the physically exhausting and crushing labor regimen in the Soviet camps.[14]

Solzhenitsyn was transferred out of New Jerusalem when it became a camp for German prisoners of war. He spent the next 10 months doing forced labor at Kaluga Gate in Moscow, and was then transferred back to Butyrka Prison for two months. Solzhenitsyn was temporarily saved from the hardships and drudgery of the forced-labor camps by his degree in mathematics and physics from Rostov University. He was recategorized as a “special-assignment prisoner,” and was sent to several special prison institutes, known as sharashkas, for scientific research.[15]

The relative comfort of being a special-assignment prisoner ended on May 19, 1950 when Solzhenitsyn was transferred back to Butyrka Prison. Solzhenitsyn then began a long and insufferable two-month journey across the Soviet Union to the Ekibastuz Labor Camp, deep in the semi-arid steppes of Kazakhstan. At Ekibastuz he experienced starvation rations, cruelty and bullying, and manual labor amidst the cold icy winds which slashed across the steppe. In addition to this incredible suffering, Solzhenitsyn was diagnosed on January 30, 1952 with cancer and admitted to the camp hospital.[16]

Solzhenitsyn eventually made a complete recovery after an operation to remove the cancer. His close encounter with death from cancer, combined with his experiences as a front-line soldier and his subsequent imprisonment, had helped Solzhenitsyn to recognize God. Solzhenitsyn later said: “When at the end of jail, on top of everything else, I was placed with cancer, then I was fully cleansed and came back to a deep awareness of God and a deep understanding of life.” Solzhenitsyn also resolved to tell the full truth about life in Stalin’s prison camps.[17]

Solzhenitsyn was released from prison on February 13, 1953, four days after the official end of his sentence. He was hired in April 1953 as a teacher of math and science at a local school. Solzhenitsyn survived a second bout with cancer, and was declared politically rehabilitated following a session of the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR on February 6, 1956. Having been strengthened and purified by his time in prison and bouts with cancer, Solzhenitsyn was primed and ready to explode onto an unsuspecting literary world.[18]

Literary Success

Solzhenitsyn wrote a short novel titled One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovichdescribing some of his labor-camp experiences. He didn’t risk showing this novel to any editors until after Nikita Khrushchev’s second de-Stalinization speech in the fall of 1961. Khrushchev, who apparently only superficially glanced at this book, approved its publication because he thought it could be used as an effective weapon against his Stalinist adversaries. Solzhenitsyn’s book became an international bestseller when it was published in November 1962. Many Russian readers wept over its pages, while foreigners were shocked by its stark revelations.[19]

Solzhenitsyn managed to publish two short stories immediately after his success with Ivan Denisovich. However, Khrushchev was overthrown in October 1964 in a palace coup that placed Leonid Brezhnev at the head of the Soviet Communist Party. Brezhnev began reversing Khrushchev’s reforms, and Solzhenitsyn had many of his manuscripts confiscated by the security services.[20]

Solzhenitsyn managed to smuggle both volumes of his new novel, Cancer Ward, as well as some other books to the West. He forged an international reputation as Russia’s greatest living writer. Unfortunately, the new head of the KGB, Yuri Andropov, considered Solzhenitsyn to be a subversive. Andropov drafted a decree for the Politburo to deprive Solzhenitsyn of his citizenship and expel him from the Soviet Union. Consequently, when Solzhenitsyn won the 1970 Nobel Prize in Literature, Solzhenitsyn decided not to go to Stockholm to receive his prize because he feared he would be barred from returning to the Soviet Union.[21]

Solzhenitsyn continued to experience literary success, and he became a world-famous living symbol of the struggle for human rights in the face of state censorship. His historical novel August 1914, which was published in the West on June 11, 1971, denounced all Marxism as evil. Solzhenitsyn’s work was translated into 35 languages during 1972. When a copy of Solzhenitsyn’s book The Gulag Archipelagowas discovered by Soviet authorities, Solzhenitsyn decided to publish it in the West as soon as possible. The Soviet authorities were enraged when the first volume of The Gulag Archipelago was published in Paris in December 1973. Solzhenitsyn had become a traitor in the eyes of the Soviet leaders.[22]


On February 13, 1974, Solzhenitsyn was formally charged with treason and expelled from the Soviet Union. The United States, Great Britain and many other nations told Solzhenitsyn he would be welcome to reside in their countries if he wished. Solzhenitsyn chose Zurich, Switzerland as his initial place of residence. From Zurich, Solzhenitsyn traveled to Stockholm in December 1974 to finally collect his Nobel Prize in Literature.[23]

Solzhenitsyn moved to the United States two years later during the summer of 1976. He arrived in America at a time when Americans were struggling for an adequate response to a perceived Soviet threat. As a Nobel laureate and dissident, who had quite literally put his life on the line in a mesmerizing duel with Soviet authorities, Solzhenitsyn inevitably attracted the interest of influential Americans. He was asked by numerous prominent members of Congress, labor leaders, and members of the Western mass media to comment on democracy and American political life.[24]

In two separate speeches at AFL-CIO banquets, Solzhenitsyn alerted his audiences to the expanding communist menace. Solzhenitsyn stressed the unscientific and specious nature of Marxism-Leninism, as well as its lethal and aggressive nature. He warned that only firmness makes it possible to withstand the assaults of communist totalitarianism.[25]

Solzhenitsyn resided in south-central Vermont throughout 1977 and the first half of 1978 while working on a multi-volume historical novel. He unexpectedly was asked to deliver the commencement address at Harvard University on June 8, 1978. Solzhenitsyn accepted Harvard’s invitation, and in a televised address before 15,000-20,000 guests, he made some extremely frank and critical comments on the state of the West. Among other things, Solzhenitsyn criticized the Western media, which “miseducates” public opinion and fails to provide the in-depth analysis which society needs.[26]

Solzhenitsyn in his Harvard address also mentioned the striking decline in courage in the West. He said this decline in courage was particularly noticeable among the ruling and intellectual elites, which gave an impression of a loss of courage by the entire society. Solzhenitsyn said that while there were many courageous individuals in Western society, they had no determining influence on public life. Solzhenitsyn noted that from ancient times declining courage in a civilization had been the first symptom of its end.[27]

While rejecting socialism as an alternative to Western society, Solzhenitsyn also rejected the West as a model for the Soviet Union. Solzhenitsyn said that through deep suffering, his people had achieved a spiritual development of such intensity that the Western system in its present state did not look attractive. The insidious corruption of commercial advertising, TV stupor, intolerable music, and lack of spirituality in the West would not be attractive to the Soviet Union’s citizens.[28]
 Solzhenitsyn had become disillusioned with what he considered was the spiritual vacuum of the materialistic West.

Solzhenitsyn had a deep-seated disdain for the Western media, which he revealed in his interview with Sixty Minutes. When asked to respond to an American commentator who had branded him “a freak, a monarchist, an anti-Semite, a crank, a has-been, not a hero,” Solzhenitsyn replied:

The Western press works in the following way: they don’t read my books. No one has ever given a single quotation from any of my books as a basis for these accusations. But every new journalist reads these opinions from other journalists. They have been just as spiteful to me in the American press as the Soviet press was before.[29]

Return Home

Although Solzhenitsyn had been kicked out of Russia, he always loved Russia and wanted to return to his native country. On August 16, 1990, Solzhenitsyn’s Russian citizenship was restored almost 17 years after it had been taken away from him. Solzhenitsyn returned to Russia on May 27, 1994, for the first time in more than 20 years.[30]

The Russia Solzhenitsyn returned home to was transforming from communism in poor and deteriorating circumstances. Western culture and multinational corporations were moving in, with Western restaurants such as McDonalds ubiquitous in the cities. Solzhenitsyn expressed his dismay at Russia’s cultural decline in a speech he made at Saratov University in 1995. Solzhenitsyn said: “We are still holding together as a single unified country, but our cultural space is in shreds.” Solzhenitsyn later said he would refrain from voting for either Yeltsin or his Communist opponent, as neither candidate was worthy of being elected.[31]

After extensive research, Solzhenitsyn realized that the Russian Revolution was primarily perpetrated by Jews, most of whom were imported into Russia from other countries. He said in 2002:

You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse.

The October Revolution was not what you call in America the “Russian Revolution.” It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history.

It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators.[32]

Solzhenitsyn wrote a two-volume nonfiction work titled Two Hundred Years Together. The first volume, published in 2001, was Russian-Jewish History 1795-1916 and ran to 512 pages. The second volume, which was published in 2002, was a 600-page investigation titled The Jews in the Soviet Union.[33] This second volume exposed the predominantly Jewish constitution of the Bolshevik Revolution. No English-language translation of this work has been commercially published, and the only version of it offered on Amazon is the original Russian, at $978 as of May 2021.

Solzhenitsyn lived out his final years in Russia. On June 5, 2007, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree conferring the State Prize of the Russian Federation upon Solzhenitsyn for his humanitarian work. Putin, who personally visited the writer at his home to give him the award, said about Solzhenitsyn: “His activities as a writer and public figure, his entire long, thorny life journey will remain for us a model of true devotion, selfless service to the people, motherland, the ideals of freedom, justice and humanism.” Solzhenitsyn died August 3, 2008 near Moscow at Age 89.[34]


Solzhenitsyn had an intense sense of mission about his literary work. He felt it was his ethical duty to publicly expose the Soviet Union’s shocking and murderous gulag system. One of the particulars of Solzhenitsyn’s literary genius was his overwhelming willpower. French author Nikita Struve wrote:

But Solzhenitsyn’s fate, life and work are characterized above all by will. To survive four years at the front, live through the Soviet concentration camps, overcome serious illness, struggle to become a writer, gain a world reputation against inhuman odds, and finally unswervingly to follow his path—all this is a miracle of rare willpower.[35]

It is widely recognized that Solzhenitsyn had a major influence on the modern world. There is broad agreement that no other book contributed more directly and forcefully to the collapse of the Soviet Union than his book The Gulag Archipelago.[36]

Solzhenitsyn’s suffering and literary genius enabled him to expose the evils of Soviet Communism. Dr. David Duke writes about Solzhenitsyn: “He was a victim of Bolshevism and through his literary genius he laid bare the most horrific killing machine in all of world history.”[37]

A version of this article was originally published in the March/April 2021 issue of The Barnes Review.

If You Still Believe The Mainstream Narrative On COVID, Then

If you still believe in the mainstream narrative, I have a few questions for you that I genuinely cannot answer:

if you still believe the mainstream narrative on covid, then answer these questions

Image source:

Explain how the flu disappearedbut has been replaced with something which has the EXACT same symptoms.

Explain why they downgraded “Covid-19” from a high consequential infectious disease days before they declared a pandemic.

Explain how they pulled the coronavirus Act 2020 legislation together in a matter of days, despite the act being several hundred pages long.

Explain why they have completely changed normal practice and used criteria like “deaths for ANY reason within 28 days of a positive test” to classify a Covid-19 death.

Explain why they banned autopsies of anyone dying from/with Covid-19.

Explain why they changed the law to allow any practitioner to diagnose Covid through observation alone, even if it is done through video consultation.

Explain why undertakers have seen no difference in burials or cremations.

Explain how all cause mortalityis at an all time low.

Explain how millions of protesters across the globe aren’t getting sick with “Covid.”

Explain how this is the only crisis that needs an advertising campaign paired with a constant barrage of repetitive brainwashing propaganda on the TV and in the streets.

Explain how hundreds of thousands of people marched through the streets of Londonfor an afternoon last month but it wasn’t once shown on ANY TV channel or reported in the mainstream press.

Explain how thousands were yelling “shame on you” outside the BBC HQ in both London, Manchester and Cardiff last Saturday but it wasn’t shown on the TV?

Explain how the people who are wearing the masks and following the rules are the only ones who are catching “COVID”.

Explain how the creator of the PCR amplification tool is on record for stating that the PCR was not designed as a test for infectious diseases.

Explain why they are using the PCR to diagnose an infectious disease.

Explain why the concern has been changed from Covid deaths, to hospitalisations to Covid infections to Covid “cases” .

Explain how the “anti-vaxxers” are being blamed for the rise in “cases” when the only people who could possibly be contributing to the statistics are the people who are getting the “test” in the first place.

Explain why the hospitals were emptier than normal during the height of the “pandemic.”

Explain why whistleblowers are reporting that the hospitals are now filling up with vaccine adverse reactions but the MSM aren’t reporting it.

Explain why kids need to be vaccinated when, by your own definitions, Covid isn’t dangerous to children.

Explain, if all the vulnerable people have already been vaccinated, why do all the healthy people need to get vaccinated if you’re already protected by your own vaccine and the recovery rate was already 99.96% without the vaccine.

Explain why the average age of death with “Covid” (82.4 years) is higher than the average age of death without (81.5 years).

Explain how you can get banned from Facebook and Twitter for sharing official government links.

Explain why there are several class actions in progress, taking governments across the globe to court for crimes against humanity, but there is zero MSM coverage.

Explain why most government leaders are reading from the same script.

Explain how all the things that you were laughing at us for talking about last year are now becoming a reality this year e.g. vaccine passports and mass surveillance (NHS app).

Explain why we have all the answers but you have nothing.

via Rory Winter on

Doctors Face Unprecedented Coercion from Professional Bodies


(left, Bill Vaccine Hands)

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario made it clear that any physician criticizing health policy risks losing his or her medical licence.

Health Bullies Muzzle Canadian Doctorsby Janice Fiamengo(
One of the many remarkable features of the COVID “new normal” has been the seemingly widespread compliance of doctors with draconian and irrational health mandates.
Such mandates have included unprecedented school closures, curfew orders, prohibitions on hugging, magical-thinking restaurant policies, restrictions on outdoor activities, harsh fines for drive-in church services, interdictions on businesses selling items deemed non-essential, and excessive force by police to uphold the orders.
We have heard little from doctors even on subjects presumably close to physicians’ hearts, such as the cancellations of non-emergency surgeries, the use of “virtual'” medical consultations, and the yearlong isolation of the elderly in care homes.
My mother, in her 90th year and with various health ailments (still, fortunately, living in her own home), has been unable to see her doctor in person, with one brief exception last summer, over the past 14 months. Once-regular visits have been replaced by phone consultations in an increasingly remote relationship. I have often wondered whether her doctor honestly believes that such distancing is a necessary and commensurate response to the pandemic.
Recently, however, the silence of doctors has became more explicable.
On April 30, 2021, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO), an organization empowered by law to regulate the practice of medicine province-wide, made an official statement warning doctors not to speak out against any government COVID orders. Referring to “isolated incidents of physicians using social media to spread blatant misinformation and undermine public health measures meant to protect all of us,” the college made it clear that any physician criticizing health policy risks losing his or her medical licence…DERELICTION OF DUTY
Let’s not dwell on the colossal irony of a public health body condemning so-called “misinformation” in light of the notable contradictions and lack of scientific underpinning of Canadian health authorities’ own (frequently changing) statements. These authorities have regularly flouted “available evidence” in their public statements about risks to Canadians, viral transmission routes, mask efficacy, lockdown benefits, and vaccines.
In fact, officials’ frequent flip-flops make it difficult to imagine how discipline would be meted out by the CPSO. Would a doctor who spoke out against the AstraZeneca vaccine in early March be punished for “publicly contradicting public health … recommendations,” or would that doctor be applauded for anticipating Canada’s own (later) decision to suspend AstraZeneca?
What would happen to a doctor who criticized measures now widely recognized as inhumane, such as isolating children from their families in the case of possible COVID contact, or preventing family members from visiting care home residents for over a year?
Is the CPSO certain that its own recommendations, if thoroughly investigated, would escape designation as “unsupported, unproven treatments”?
Officials have studiously ignored the well-known deleterious health consequences of their harsh directives while continually stoking public fear with daily death announcements and warnings about second, third, fourth, and future variant “waves.”
One wonders how it could possibly be in the public interest that, even in cases in which a medical practitioner is convinced that certain health rules are damaging, the doctor still “must not make comments or provide advice that encourages the public to act contrary to public health orders.” Does this prohibition not violate every doctor’s primary commitment to do no harm?
The situation is not unique to Ontario. Doctors in British Columbia are similarly being warned that they face discipline if they contradict health recommendations, a warning contained in a joint statement by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC and the First Nations Health Authority. The statement specifically prohibits B.C. doctors from promoting “anti-vaccine, anti-mask wearing, anti-physical distancing, and anti-lockdown stances.”
Such statements are deeply unsettling. While there is undoubtedly no shortage of falsehoods and conspiracy theories in the age of COVID-19, the sweeping censorship of medical professionals is not only an ethical sham but is also profoundly anti-scientific. All medical knowledge is premised on the rigorous application of the scientific method, with its requirement of falsifiability, debate, and disputation over evidence.
Clearly, there can be no genuine debate when doctors fear the loss of their livelihoods for dissenting from official policy. The forcing of medical unanimity will inevitably weaken public trust not only in health bodies like the colleges of physicians and surgeons, rightly judged to be exercising tyrannical power, but also in all aspects of a health-care system in which doctors cannot communicate openly and honestly with their patients.
Fortunately, there has been some pushback from the Canadian community in the form of a Declaration of Canadian Physicians for Science and Truth, which alleges that the statement by the CPSO represents a “watershed moment in the assault on free speech and scientific inquiry” as well as a potential “crime against humanity.”
The declaration’s website features a petition that has been signed by over 11,000 physicians and concerned citizens at the time of this writing (an encouraging number, though still too low). These physicians object that the order violates doctors’ pledge to put their patients’ well-being above any other loyalty, use evidence-based medicine in their practice, and fully inform patients of the risks and benefits of treatments. The doctors demand that the CPSO immediately “withdraw and rescind its statement.” Unfortunately, the CPSO has not yet done so.
It doesn’t require a background in medicine to know that censorship of medical professionals during a pandemic is an outrageous and dangerous act. There is no better time than now for rigorous debate on the efficacy of public health measures, with unproven and potentially catastrophic lockdown policies and vaccine passports being forced on populations worldwide.——————————————–Janice Fiamengo is a professor of English at the University of Ottawa. Her latest book is “Sons of Feminism: Men Have Their Say.”


On a video put together by John Henry called “Voddie Baucham Provides Answers about Women Pastors, Teachers, and Elders in the Church,” John goes back and forth between an interview with Joyce Meyer and a sermon being preached by Voddie Baucham to show the fallacy that women make to justify preaching. (I summarized the video.)

A woman who works for Joyce asked her: “When you began your ministry in 1976, what God expected of women was very different from what God was calling you to do. How did you deal with that?”

Joyce answered: “I was so caught up in what I *felt* like God was calling me to do.”

Voddie: “Just because you *feel* like you were called to do something, doesn’t give you the right to overthrow biblical qualifications.”

Joyce: “I didn’t know women couldn’t preach until people started telling me. The church felt like I wasn’t supposed to be teaching. Dave should be teaching.”

Voddie: “‘But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence’ (1 Timothy 2:12). Because the Bible says so. No one gets to do everything they *feel* they are gifted at.”

Joyce preaching to a huge audience filled with men and women: “We’re all equal. God has gifted me to be up here.”

Voddie: “What if a man *feels* gifted to be a pastor but has several wives? God says he must have ‘one wife.’ Just because you *feel* gifted to do something, doesn’t give you the right to overthrow biblical qualifications.”

Joyce in her interview: “I didn’t want to just teach women. God gave me a verse in Philippians 2 that told me that I was to teach Scripture to all men. I never felt called to just teach women.”

Voddie: “The office of the elder is to be a ‘husband of one wife.’ Pastors must be men!”

The author of the video, John Henry said, ‘The question asked to Joyce Meyer was Cultural Marxism, Feminism, and even Christian Progressivism. It wasn’t based on anything biblical. ‘I felt like…’ This is what happens when everything is based on our feelings.”

Then the video switched to an interview with Voddie on CNN after Sarah Palin was selected as Vice President candidate:

Voddie when asked about Sarah being selected as VP when women weren’t even supposed to preach in the churches: “Feminism has gained a foothold in many evangelical churches. Culture doesn’t dictate truth. The Gospel dictates truth.

CNN moderator: “What about Deborah?”

Voddie: “The fact that something happened doesn’t mean it’s normative for the Church. In Isaiah 3, we’re told a sign that a nation is under judgement when women are in leadership.”

Another women on CNN used Ephesians 5 to claim that Sarah’s husband laid down his life so Sarah could run for the VP, and that working class families must have two incomes to survive. She tried to justify what Sarah was doing.

Voddie: You are playing fast and lose with the text, since it states that the man is head of the wife. You are ignoring that Palin’s role is governed by Scripture, not by what we feel. My job isn’t to translate Scripture into working class families. My job is to be honest with the text. The text say that women are to be keepers of their homes. I will not violate the teachings of Scripture in order to sound more appropriate for the culture. I am a herald of the truth of the Gospel, and my job is NOT to teach the Gospel according to what I think the culture wants to hear.”

For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
1 Corinthians 14:33, 34

She Felt Called to Preach to Men

Insouciance Destroyed America

Insouciance Destroyed America

Paul Craig Roberts

Most Americans have no idea how far gone their country is.  We not only have the Biden regime announcing solidarity with BLM and flying the BLM flag at US embassies and consular missions, US military recruitment videos stressing recruitment of lesbian females, men dressing as women, and Americans having their genitals removed so they can become “no gender”, we have Democrat school systems teaching white people self-hate and infusing them with guilt and making them effective agents in reconstructing America as a racial caste system favoring blacks.

In the Spring 2021 issue of City Journalpublished by the Manhattan Institute, Christopher F. Rufo documents with their own words and deeds how the Oregon public school system has abandoned education for cult indoctrination.

Rufo focuses on the school systems in Tigard-Tualatin, Beaverton, and Portland where white Americans account for 98-99 percent of the population. Using their own documents and official statements, he shows that the purpose of the education bureaucrats is to destroy the confidence of white students and infuse them with “white guilt,”  “white shame,” and self-loathing. A hate speech code is institutionalized, the purpose of which is “to pathologize any political opposition to the new order.”  The cause of oppression is “whiteness” and white values of color-blindness, individualism, and meritocracy.

In place of advancement by merit there is to be advancement based on “equity,” which means outcomes that favor blacks independently of merit. Color-blindness is denounced as a white trick to uphold a merit-based system.  Individualism is to be replaced with group think described by Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg  as his ideal where everyone complies with group thought controlled by him and a handful of others of the “new order.” 

The New York Times’ 1619 Project has allied American media with the attack on  the United States Constitution.  According to the New York Times and the Oregon public school system, the Constitution is a racist document written for the sole purpose of institutionalizing black slavery in the foundation of the American state.

As Rufo notices, “We have reached the strange reality in which the state, through the organs of education, agitates for its own destruction. Educators have condemned the entire structure of the social order and celebrated those who would tear it down.”

It is clear that white liberals have succeeded in destroying the belief of many Americans in the rule of law and the Constitution by denouncing these historic achievements as “tools of white supremacy.”

Some red states have passed laws prohibiting the teaching of the demonization of white Americans in their states.  What is likely to happen is that the presstitutes, the intellectuals, and the anti-white US Department of Justice will overthrow the state laws as a form of McCarthyism that prohibits freedom of expression.

In other words, freedom of expression is limited to denunciation of the founding values of the United States as white supremacist and white Americans as “systemic racist oppressors.”

Today the states are disunited between blue and red to a far greater extent than they were in 1860.  There are two countries today occupying the same geographical location.  One, the red states, believe in America and its founding documents.  The other, the blue states, believe that America epitomizes white supremacy evil.

The message is clear. From the Democrats the message is that white Americans must submit to blacks whom they have wronged.  From the Red States the response is that whites freed the blacks from the slavery that their black brothers sold them into, whites passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution that guarantee blacks equality before the law. The claim that white Americans denied these protections to blacks is a lie by traitors guilty of treason who intend to overthrow the United States of America.

The only way out of this is civil war. We will learn if the red states have enough confidence and will to defend the Constitutional rights of white Americans.

Otherwise we will have, as was predicted some years ago, a “dispossessed majority.” White Americans could be dispossessed not only of their legal and Constitutional rights, but also of their lives.

Insouciance Destroyed America

Officer Of The Year Confesses To Child Rape Ring, Names Fellow Cops, Then Kills Himself

Liberty County, TX — Last week, a standoff took place between Liberty County law enforcement and a fellow cop from one county over. Harris County Precinct 1 deputy Robert Johnson engaged in a standoff with multiple SWAT officers for several hours before taking his own life.

officer of the year confesses to child rape ring, names fellow cops, then kills himself

After his suicide, we learned that during this standoff, this decorated Houston cop had confessed to utterly horrifying crimes against children. He also named names.

According to authorities in Liberty County, Johnson became the subject of an investigation earlier this month over allegations he had sexually abused a child.

KPRC reports:

On May 14, the investigation began when a dispatcher was being evaluated on their work performance, according to Pct. Constable Alan Rosen.

He said during the evaluation, the dispatcher made an outcry about the child abuse allegations involving Precinct 1 Deputy Constable Robert Johnson.

Rosen said the allegations were reported to Internal Affairs and the investigation began.

He said on Monday morning the department contacted the Houston Police Department to investigate the case, where investigators found out the incidents took place in Alvin.

Rosen said HPD and CPS contacted the Alvin Police Department about the allegations. He said Alvin police tried to make contact with Johnson.

On Wednesday morning, Rosen said that the same dispatcher who made the outcry said she was with Johnson and that he was threatening to kill her and take his life.

When police attempted to find Johnson for questioning, they engaged in a traffic stop. The stop turned into a dangerous chase with Johnson reportedly travelling at high speeds into oncoming traffic.

Eventually Johnson came to a stop on the FM 787 bridge over the Trinity River where a standoff ensued.

During the standoff he reportedly called his supervisor and confessed to the allegations of sex abuse of multiple children.

He also named other employees within the Harris county sheriff’s office who were involved.

“Chief Harrison spoke to Johnson for hours because it was important to us to try to prevent a suicide and most importantly to get any and all facts relative to this case that we could get from him,” Harris County Constable Alan Rosen said.

“We wanted to know everything. We wanted to know who the victims are and how long this has been going on.”

Two of the people mentioned by Johnson during his confession have since been arrested.

Dispatcher Christina McKay and deputy Chonda Shalett Williams were fired from the police department before being arrested for their involvement in the child sex ring as alleged by Johnson.

“There was a lot of people who spoke highly of him as a police officer. It’s pretty apparent that everyone around this guy had no idea he was a pedophile. No idea. Not his wife. Not his friends. Not his coworkers. Nobody,” Rosen said.

But as the two arrests show, his coworkers did know and actually participated in it.

According to KPRC, McKay is charged with aggravated sexual assault of a child and Williams is charged with sexual assault of a child. Both are being held at the Brazoria County Jail and have bonds set at $200,000.

According to court documents, Johnson and Williams drugged a child together before raping them. The allegations were made by the child who came forward to report the incident which happened in December 2020.

Williams reportedly admitted to the incident and admitted to seeing Johnson rape an unconscious child in a hotel room.

According to the same court documents, McKay admitted to providing Johnson with pills so he could use them to render his child victims unconscious.

McKay knew about the abuse, according to the records, as far back as August 2020 but never reported it out of fear of Johnson’s retaliation.

Highlighting the scope and frequency of the abuse, McKay admitted to booking hotel rooms and supplying drugs at least 20 times in the last 12 months. spoke to a former girlfriend of Johnson, on the condition of anonymity, who said there may be many more victims coming forward.

She told Bluebonnet News that he was an abusive narcissist who preyed on vulnerable women, particularly those with children. With Johnson now dead and no longer a threat, other young victims may come forward, she said.

Others apparently had no idea this man was a pedophile in a uniform and despite being fired in 2012 for an inappropriate relationship, Johnson went on to Harris county where he was hired with open arms and received multiple awards, including officer of the year.