By P. Andrew Sandlin
Published February 1, 1994
If I were given the ignoble task of subverting a culture, I have a fair idea of what my agenda would be.
First, I would trivialize its religion. Since religion is an essential ingredient of culture (the word’s very root betrays its indissoluble link to religion), I would assure that the civil government discouraged religion by banning it from any place in government itself, and especially in education. I would be shrewd however. I would not state plainly I was trying to eliminate the traditional religion; instead I would appeal to the fact that civil government should not be in the religion-promoting business in the first place. If schools in this culture were the province of the government rather than of private citizens, I could excise religion much more easily.
I would argue loudly that the rights of children would be violated if some were forced to watch others pray or talk about their religion. I would declare in the most altruistic and moral tones that religion has its place in church and nowhere else. Since youth are more moldable than adults, I am convinced this tactic would be especially effective. In this way I would convince naive but fair minded people that I was being neutral, when in reality, I would be using neutrality as a guise to promote my hidden agenda. In the literature and acting of that culture I would depict the culture’s traditional religion and its followers as hypocritical, bumbling and unsophisticated. I would render it likely that the youth would consider the traditional religion a panacea for foolish old women and emasculated men, the mentally and emotionally unstable.
Next, I would sever the foundational associations of the culture, voluntary or otherwise, since these, like religion, are the adhesive that holds cultures together. I would devalue the importance of the idea of family in that culture. I would assert that nobody has a right to say which family is the “right” family, all the while knowing I was concerned only that one sort of family, the traditional one, be weakened or destroyed.
I would try to transfer the dependence on the traditional family for livelihood in difficult financial times and in old age to the civil government, which I would increasingly control. I would make it easy for families to break up by keeping the members away from each other most of the day and by allowing one parent to renege on the marital oath for the most trivial reasons. I would persuade the citizens that they themselves, and not their children, are most important, and that they should entrust the bothersome children to the daily care of me and my subversive friends, who would ceaselessly inculcate into the children’s tractable minds our own subversive ideas.
Afterward, I would undermine the money system of the culture by stressing instant gratification and government interference. I would convince the citizens of the culture that wealth and possessions are the most important things in life, and that they can have both before they earn them by work. I would encourage them to borrow wealth and possessions on the promise to pay back the lenders, and then push the citizens to borrow beyond what they can reasonably repay. I would do this quite easily by displaying a certain “standard of living” as normative, inciting peer pressure to cause the recalcitrant to conform if they are to expect to be treated as “normal.”
I would assure that the government, in addition, spends more money than it raises by taxation. The way I would accomplish this would be by persuading the government leaders to promise free wealth, possessions and services to the citizens (who would already be satisfied with nothing less than more wealth and possessions) if the citizens would let them become (or remain) leaders. As a result, the citizenry is tied to debt by leaders who must spend into debt in order to please them. Consequently both the citizens and the government would suffer from severe debt.
Then I would insist to the leaders that the only way to survive debt would be to inflate the currency even more so citizens could pay off some debts, an action that would make debtors happy but creditors and investors angry since money invested and lent loses value just like money owed. Investors would have no incentive to reinvest. This factor would eventually and inevitably cause the economy to collapse.
Then I would debase the arts, a staple of culture. I would convince artists it is chic to compose or perform senseless, nihilistic works of art. I would insist they deal with cheap, bawdy and sensual themes, calculated to drive the youth to both fantasy and despair. I would do everything imaginable to obscure the traditional music of the culture. By various media I would have performers display bizarre behavior and tout it everywhere as normal. This would cause people to abandon the type of living that shaped the culture in the first place.
Finally, I would encourage all forms of countercultural deportment, especially countercultural morals and defy anyone to restrict me. If they did, I would accuse them of trying to limit freedom. I would use freedom as a means to subvert freedom. I would appeal to noble themes like freedom and equality in order to crush freedom and equality and enthrone my own subversive agenda. For instance, under the guise of personal freedom I would restrict the freedom of local areas to legislate against moral evils in their community, evils whose proliferation would enhance the subversion of the culture.
Moreover, under the guise of economic freedom I would limit the freedom of some citizens by confiscating their property in order to limit the freedom of other citizens by keeping them dependent on the government for subsistence. Under the guise of equality I would render the culture radically unequal by tipping economic advantage in favor of those who are likely to preserve my subversive program and shouting down those who appeal for equal time against my agenda. I would operate allegedly on the assumption that all are deserving of the policies of equality, but some are more equally deserving than others.
Gratifyingly, attempts of such subversion are highly unlikely to happen in our United States.
Forerunner - Home » The Forerunner Newspaper » Reconstruction
Your comments are welcome!
Visit The Forerunner's Discussion Forum!
Download the Free Study Guide!
Just what is Calvinism?
Does this teaching make man a deterministic robot and God the author of sin? What about free will? If the church accepts Calvinism, won’t evangelism be stifled, perhaps even extinguished? How can we balance God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility? What are the differences between historic Calvinism and hyper-Calvinism? Why did men like Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Spurgeon, Whitefield, Edwards and a host of renowned Protestant evangelists embrace the teaching of predestination and election and deny free will theology?
This is the first video documentary that answers these and other related questions. Hosted by Eric Holmberg, this fascinating three-part, four-hour presentation is detailed enough so as to not gloss over the controversy. At the same time, it is broken up into ten “Sunday-school-sized” sections to make the rich content manageable and accessible for the average viewer.
Running Time: 257 minutes
$19.95 — ORDER NOW!(We accept all major credit cards and PayPal.)
Who is the dreaded beast of Revelation?
Now at last, a plausible candidate for this personification of evil incarnate has been identified (or re-identified). Ken Gentry’s insightful analysis of scripture and history is likely to revolutionize your understanding of the book of Revelation — and even more importantly — amplify and energize your entire Christian worldview!
Historical footage and other graphics are used to illustrate the lecture Dr. Gentry presented at the 1999 Ligonier Conference in Orlando, Florida. It is followed by a one-hour question and answer session addressing the key concerns and objections typically raised in response to his position. This presentation also features an introduction that touches on not only the confusion and controversy surrounding this issue — but just why it may well be one of the most significant issues facing the Church today.
Ideal for group meetings, personal Bible study — for anyone who wants to understand the historical context of John’s famous letter “… to the seven churches which are in Asia.” (Revelation 1:4)
Running Time: 145 minutes
$17.95 — ORDER NOW!(We accept all major credit cards and PayPal.)
Foundations in Biblical Eschatology
By Jay Rogers, Larry Waugh, Rodney Stortz, Joseph Meiring. High quality paperback, 167 pages.
All Christians believe that their great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, will one day return. Although we cannot know the exact time of His return, what exactly did Jesus mean when he spoke of the signs of His coming (Mat. 24)? How are we to interpret the prophecies in Isaiah regarding the time when “the earth will be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea” (Isa. 11:19)? Should we expect a time of great tribulation and apostasy or revival and reformation before the Lord returns? Is the devil bound now, and are the saints reigning with Christ? Did you know that there are four hermeneutical approaches to the book of Daniel and Revelation?
These and many more questions are dealt with by four authors as they present the four views on the millennium. Each view is then critiqued by the other three authors.
$12.95 — ORDER NOW!(We accept all major credit cards and PayPal.)
“Here I stand … I can do no other!”
With these immortal words, an unknown German monk sparked a spiritual revolution that changed the world.
The dramatic classic film of Martin Luther’s life was released in theaters worldwide in the 1950s and was nominated for two Oscars. A magnificent depiction of Luther and the forces at work in the surrounding society that resulted in his historic reform efforts, this film traces Luther’s life from a guilt-burdened monk to his eventual break with the Roman Catholic Church.
Running time: 105 minutes
Special offer: Order 5 or more for $5 each.
Watch a clip from Martin Luther.
$9.95 — ORDER NOW!(We accept all major credit cards and PayPal.)
With “preaching to the lost” being such a basic foundation of Christianity, why do many in the church seem to be apathetic on this issue of preaching in highways and byways of towns and cities?
Is it biblical to stand in the public places of the world and proclaim the gospel, regardless if people want to hear it or not?
Does the Bible really call church pastors, leaders and evangelists to proclaim the gospel in the public square as part of obedience to the Great Commission, or is public preaching something that is outdated and not applicable for our day and age?
These any many other questions are answered in this documentary.
$19.95 — ORDER NOW!(We accept all major credit cards and PayPal.)