Present But Not Accounted For
June 25, 2023 Leave a comment
The death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus– who did the evangelists turn to for their record of these events? They relied on the testimony of several women – supporters and disciples – who had been with Jesus from the earliest days of his Galilean ministry and followed him to Jerusalem. The women were authoritative apostolic witnesses of these events in the early Christian community. Their telling and retelling of these events shaped the Gospel tradition.
The four gospel accounts variously record the women’s eyewitness testimony of the exceptional events in spite of what is alleged about a first century woman’s testimony not considered credible in a court run by men.
The gospel writers, as did other ancient historiographers, set great store in the role of eyewitnesses.[1] First-hand accounts of what was seen and heard and its interpretation were the most reliable. As a matter of record and for a connection to the sources, the identities of the women who witnessed the events of the Passion and resurrection are clearly identified by the gospel writers (see Women as Eyewitnesses below). The women were present and accounted for in the gospels.
Across the four gospel accounts, two or three women are noted to be at the cross, at the burial and at the empty tomb. This would fulfill Torah’s requirement (Deut. 19:15) for two or three witnesses for evidence to be substantiated.
We can be thankful that the women’s eyewitness testimonies, even if rejected by a first century court of men, provides for us today the historical reality of the extraordinary events. Those who have not seen the risen Lord are dependent on those who have such as Mary Magdalene, an apostle to the apostles, who said “I have seen the Lord!”
The women’s testimony, even if rejected by men, certainly didn’t preclude women in the community from accepting it. The women’s firsthand account of the events spread throughout the Christian community, where as many women as men, and likely more, were drawn to early Christianity. And where the role of the women as benefactors and disciples of Jesus was already well-known.[2] That a woman was commissioned by Jesus to be his “go and tell” witness – this was no surprise. The resurrection was the “Do you know what this means!” surprise.
For the women involved, it wasn’t a matter of passive observation. It involved active understanding, as Richard Bauckham, in Gospel Women: Studies of the Named Women in the Gospels writes [3]:
“It would be a mistake to envisage the women’s role of eyewitnesses as a passive one. As participants in events that radically changed their own lives, the women, in telling and retelling the stories of the events of the passion and resurrection, were also interpreting the significance of the events.”
It would also be a mistake to assume that what the women were relating had to reinterpreted and retold by men.
Again, Richard Bauckham[4] :
“I conclude that there is no evidence to suggest that the role of women in the resurrection stories has been depreciated or limited in the Gospel narratives of Matthew, Luke, and John. Where male prejudice against the credibility is explicitly evoked (Luke 24:11), this is so that it may be decisively overturned.
“Where readers may bring such prejudice to the texts, even though the texts give no pretext for doing so, again the effect of the narratives will be to refute and to reverse assumptions of male priority and female unreliability.
“. . . it suggests that within the Christian communities themselves the role of women as witnesses was highly respected. There seems to be no evidence that it became less so over time. It is one of a variety of striking aspects of early Christianity that belong to the countercultural nature of the Christian communities as societies in which God’s eschatological overturning of social privilege was taken very seriously.” (Emphasis mine.)
Present but not accounted for: women, apostolic traditioners and eyewitness guarantors of not only the Passion and resurrection events but also of the incarnation, are not included in the kerygmatic summaries of Peter and Paul.
(Kerygmatic summaries can be thought of as basically sermon outlines open to improvisation and amplification from gospel tradition influences.)
Kerygmatic summaries in sermons (Acts 2:14-36, 3:12-36, 10:34-43, 13:16-41) and in Paul’s resurrection discussion (1 Cor. 15) do not mention the role of women. That they are not mentioned doesn’t disavow the women’s roles as apostolic traditioners and eyewitness guarantors of the gospel tradition. The sermons are an overview of the gospel story meant for a crowd not aware of it.
(Did Peter and Paul have concerns about mentioning the role of women to a patriarchal assembly? Where they concerned that their message would be rejected by male listeners? It’s a real possibility.)
What may be seen as a snub, though, is not being accounted for in Paul’s resurrection appearance list (1 Cor. 15:3-7).
Here ‘s Richard Bauckham’s take on that [5]:
“. . . we should notice that the women are not in fact, as so often assumed, absent from 1 Corinthians 15:3-7. Paul distinguishes between an appearance to the twelve and one to all the apostles, since, unlike Luke, he does not confine the term “apostle” to the twelve. At this appearance, he would have assumed that other apostles he knew, such as Barnabas, Sylvanus, and James the Lord’s brother, were present along with the twelve. Now that it is generally recognized that Paul knew and had a great respect for at least one woman apostle, Junia (Rom 16:7), we must certainly also conclude that he would have taken for granted that women were included in an appearance to “all the apostles.”
(The apostle Paul calls Andronicus and Junia (Rom 16:7) “apostles”, likely meaning that they had been present at a resurrection appearance of Jesus. The name Junia was probably the Latin name of Jesus’s disciple Joanna (Luke 8:3; 24:10).) Andronicus (Junia’s husband Chuza?) and Junia (Joanna), Palestinian Jews, were likely members of the Jerusalem church before going to Rome.
Present today but not accounted for: Women as apostolic traditioners and eyewitness guarantors of the gospel traditions in today’s sermons AND women of the same caliber and devotion to the Lord in our pulpits.
We need more women traditioners, like those who followed and supported Jesus from the earliest days of his Galilean ministry and then followed him to Jerusalem and to the cross, the burial, and the empty tomb. We need more women traditioners like those who sat at Jesus’s feet and were discipled by him: “[Martha’s] sister, Mary, sat at the Lord’s feet, listening to what he taught.” (Luke 10:39). But women today have been “roled” into submission with the weight of out of context scripture verses.
The apostle Paul, in 1 Timothy 2:14, alludes to women being deceived and about divine order needing to be observed. Does anyone think that the women supporters and disciples of Jesus were deceived and out of order? Does anyone think that women were deceived in the tomb garden as Eve had been deceived in Eden’s Garden? What I see in scripture is a reversal of status – from women easily deceived to women rightfully believed.
Paul wrote to Timothy alluding to the female only cult of Artemis (Diana) in Ephesus. The women of the cult had been deceived. The women of the cult subordinated men. Paul didn’t want that deception and disorder brought into the church community at Ephesus. Ephesus and the Diana cult were the context for “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.” (1 Tim. 2:12). Paul’s words to Timothy were of a parochial concern, intending to make Timothy be aware of what’s around him and how he could confront it.
Paul’s words to Timothy were not a universal injunction against women believing them to be unreliable in discerning what is true and good and thereby disqualified as an authoritative voice in the church. If Paul thought that, then the female apostolic traditioners and eyewitness guarantors of the birth, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus would also be suspect. That would fly in the face of reality.
Consider that throughout scripture we find that God used lowly salvation agents to bring about a reversal of status, not just for the agents e.g., Hannah and Mary, but also for Israel and the world. And, as mentioned, women – Mary and Elizabeth – were also apostolic traditioners and eyewitness guarantors of the incarnation. (Read Luke chapter 1 where events are related from a gynocentric perspective, rather than the typical androcentric perspective. Quite a pulpit!)
The narrative of women communicating the word of God is so clear in the New Testament. Women were present and accounted for in the Gospels, in the epistles and in extrabiblical sources. Today, women are being accounted for in a role, a designated role, a pre- “countercultural nature of the Christian communities as societies in which God’s eschatological overturning of social privilege was taken very seriously” role.
*****
[1] See Richard Bauckham’s Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony (William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., Grand Rapids, MI, 2017) for the role of testimony in ancient historiography and in the gospels.
[2] See chapter 5, Joanna the Apostle, in Richard Bauckham’s Gospel Women: Studies of the Named Women in the Gospels (William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., Grand Rapids, MI, 2002) for the background behind the financial support given Jesus by Joanna, the wife of Herod’s steward Chuza (Luke 8:3) and for background of women in the first century being in possession of independent financial resources.
[3] Richard Bauckham, Gospel Women: Studies of the Named Women in the Gospels (William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., Grand Rapids, MI, 2002) 302
[4] Ibid, 285-286
[5] Ibid, 310
*****
Why women should be church leaders and preachers // Ask NT Wright anything – YouTube
*****
How (Not) to Read the Bible: Making Sense of the Anti-women, Anti-scie – FaithGateway Store
How (Not) To Read the Bible (bibleproject.com)
*****
There are sermons and books on the roles for men and women. There are sermons and books about male-female hierarchy. There are sermons and books explaining gender roles in egalitarian or complementarian terms. “Roles!” “Roles!” “Roles!” There are voices so contentious and acrimonious demanding “Roles” that schisms result. The apostle Paul would be a-Pauled!
Southern Baptists vote to expel two churches led by female pastors (nbcnews.com)
“Sarah Clatworthy, a member of Lifepoint Baptist Church in San Angelo, Texas, who has called on the SBC “to shut the door to feminism and liberalism,” said she supported the ban on female pastors.
“We should leave no room for our daughters and granddaughters in the generations ahead to have confusion on where the SBC stands,” she said. “Let them know Scripture is our authority and not the culture.”’
The first century women were not feminists or liberals, though it would look that way to the legalists. They saw and reported what they had witnessed and learned. They were active in the “countercultural nature of the Christian communities as societies in which God’s eschatological nature overturning of social privilege was taken very seriously”.
Many think of Scripture and the church in androcentric terms. How could they not when they see men on a platform expounding, in male voices, what the scripture says. Have these interpreters rightly divided the word of God regarding men and women in the Kingdom of God? Have they wrongly divided men and women in the Kingdom of God into superficial roles?
I’ve read inferences and assumptions as to how things are to be: The Role of Women in the Church | Articles | Moody Church Media (moodymedia.org) and Dispensational Theology | Articles | Moody Church Media (moodymedia.org). The latter includes nonsense about a “rapture” occurring – a misinterpretation of scripture which leads one to doubt the former’s “Role of Women” interpretation.
And, I’ve read even-handed accounts: Can Women be Pastors and Preachers? What the Bible Really Says (biblestudytools.com) and Complementarianism vs Egalitarianism – Do Christians Have Gender Roles Wrong? (crosswalk.com)
Remember Genesis 2? Adam (‘adam, a generic term meaning “human person”) was split in two and Eve was formed from one half of Adam. We read that this was done to form an equal partnership that would work to bring form and function to creation, a work God started and handed over to mankind. I find this partnership emphasis continued in the apostle Paul’s writing.
As I read Paul’s letters to the individual Christian communities, as I read his explanations and guidance of how to think and relate as new creations where they’re at, I hear his admonitions: “Get your act together! The world has its way of thinking! The world has its own form and function! But you are of different stock! Think and act like it! Work together for the sake of the gospel!”
The Spirit of God has been released into the world. The Spirit of God will go where it will. Did you really think that anyone could domesticate the Holy Spirit with theology and dispensationalism and policies of roles? Sure, those things tend to make one feel safe and secure, like you have a handle on things. But as we have seen with Jesus and now with the Holy Spirit, neither one “plays” by our rules.
Finally, note that Paul wrote to the Corinthian “brothers and sisters” that God gives His gifts as He determines (1 Cor. 12:1, 11). No further distinction is made regarding their allotment.
*****
Women as Eyewitnesses
In the gospel narratives of the Passion, burial and resurrection of Jesus, there are five named eyewitnesses and two unnamed but specified eyewitnesses: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, Salome, Joanna, and Mary of Clopas, the mother of the sons of Zebedee, and the mother of Jesus. Each evangelist mentions the women significant to their readers.
These had active roles as eyewitnesses. You see, they were there in person at the cross, at the burial, and at the empty tomb, as we learn in Matthew’s gospel account:
“There were several women there [at the cross], watching from a distance. They had followed Jesus from Galilee, helping to look after his needs. They included Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of Zebedee’s sons.” (Matt 27: 55-56).
Mary Magdalene and the other Mary [the mother of James and Joseph] had watched the burial of Jesus. They had been sitting opposite the tomb (Matt. 27:61). They returned on the first day of the week to look at the tomb. (Matt: 28:1). There, they encounter an earthquake and an angel. They receive divine revelation: “He is not here; he has risen, just as he said.” (Matt. 28: 5-6). The women then receive a command to proclaim (“Go and tell”) the Lord’s resurrection to the disciples (Matt. 28: 7). As they start running to herald the news, they are suddenly met by Jesus who says “Hello!” and “Don’t be afraid” and “Go and tell my brothers that they should go to Galilee. Tell them they’ll see me there.”
The gospel of John, chapter 20, records that Mary Magdalene, after seeing the stone rolled away from the Jesus’ tomb, runs off to tell Peter and John, the one closest to Jesus, that the body was missing. Peter and John run to the tomb and check it out. Mary Magdalene must have shown them the way because she – not them – had watched the burial.
Back at the empty tomb, Mary begins crying as she looks inside. She then sees two angels who ask her why she is crying. Mary then turns and sees a figure standing nearby. She thinks it’s the gardener. The figure asks why she is crying. She explains and then Jesus reveals himself to her. Jesus then tells her “Go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I’m going up to my father and your father – to my God and your God.”
Mary Magdalene, an apostle to the apostles, went and told the disciples, “I’ve seen the Lord!” and that he said these things to her. Later, when the disciples see the Lord, they corporately say what Mary said: “We’ve seen the Lord!” Seeing is followed by belief.
Jesus told the group “God’s blessings on people who don’t see, and yet believe!”
Notice in the following synoptic gospel texts how “women” and seeing verbs are emphasized.
Matthew 27:55-56
Many women were there, watching from a distance. They had followed Jesus from Galilee to care for his needs. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of Zebedee’s sons.
Mark 15:40-41
Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joseph, and Salome. In Galilee these women had followed him and cared for his needs. Many other women who had come up with him to Jerusalem were also there.
Luke 23: 49
But all those who knew him, including the women who had followed him from Galilee, stood at a distance, watching these things.
*****
Informed Dissent:
A Nurses’ POV on COVID and Healthcare (substack.com)
“Atrazine [a herbicide] is an endocrine disrupter, which is able both demasculinize (chemically castrate) and completely feminize adult male frogs as well as other aquatic life. It has been documented to affect murine (mouse) reproductive systems.
“. . . common foods which are endocrine disruptors can cause feminization in adult human males:
“. . . Secondary hypogonadism caused by the excessive intake of isoflavones in soy milk was diagnosed. In men, an excessive intake of isoflavones may cause feminization and secondary hypogonadism.”
Kennedy is right – Atrazine and Gender Fluidity (substack.com)
Here we go. Swedes are moving in the right direction:
Sweden adopts ‘100% fossil-free’ energy target, easing way for nuclear – EURACTIV.com
Even Sweden Doesn’t Want Migrants Anymore (foreignpolicy.com)
Oh, swell!
Child trafficking:
Discord servers used in child abductions, crime rings, sextortion (nbcnews.com)
End Child Trafficking | Operation Underground Railroad (ourrescue.org)
*****
*****
Why Weren’t We Allowed To Question The Covid Vaccines? – YouTube
A Mighty Host [Lyric Video] – YouTube
A Mighty Host — Brian Sauvé: For the New Christendom (briansauve.com)
Bryson Gray – Reclaim The Rainbow (w/ @JimmyLevy & Shemeka Michelle) [MUSIC VIDEO] – YouTube
Cindy Wity 
Don’t ESG On Me
June 18, 2023 Leave a comment
“As you know in fashion, one day you’re in. And the next day, you’re out.”
If you have watched “Project Runway” then you’ve seen a small elite group of fashionistas evaluating who’s in and who’s out based on which design and designer aligns with their values. A runway is used to showcase contestant’s designs, designs created within a strict set of rules and with a limited budget and time. When I recently reviewed environmental, social, and governance (ESG) scoring, the above saying and Lifetime’s design competition came to mind – as Project ESG.
Project ESG contestants are scored by select groups as to whether their organization operates within a strict set of guidelines that align with their values. Project ESG also has runways: main street and financial statements.
“Project Runway” contestants are scored based on their creative flair, good structuring, demonstrating diversity in design skills, and the sustainability of their designs -conforming to, attuned to, or characterized by the latest trends in fashion.
How Project ESG Contestants are Scored
“Environmental, social, and governance, or ESG, is a type of financial investing where factors beyond financial considerations are considered. Companies are scored by fund managers based on varying, and undefined factors.
The environmental perspective includes anything that contributes to carbon emissions and climate change, such as energy, water, and waste management, ventilation/air quality, materials sourcing and management, and supply chain management.
The social perspective addresses the relationships and reputation a company has with its stakeholders, such as employee engagement, diversity and inclusion, health and safety, human rights and community relations, and labor practices.
The governance perspective is the internal system of practices, controls, and procedures that a company uses to govern/manage itself, such as business model resilience, risk management, legal and regulatory compliance, due diligence, and meeting external stakeholders’ needs.”
Sustainability, ESG And ISO Are Key To A Competitive Strategy | CGBC (cgbusinessconsulting.com)
“A credit score communicates a consumer’s ability to pay back debt. A bond rating provides context for an issuer’s ability to meet financial commitments and avoid default. Similarly, an ESG risk score gauges a company’s performance on ESG issues and exposure to ESG-related risks. They are calculated against a set of ESG metrics and may be expressed on a number scale or through a letter ranking system. . . (Emphasis mine.)
ESG contestants are scored on ESG issues which span everything from cybersecurity to climate change to diversity, equity, and inclusion . . .
Organizations with a good ESG score are thought to be better equipped to anticipate future risks and opportunities, more inclined to longer-term strategic thinking and to prioritize long-term value creation over short-term gains. As such, the consequences of a substandard score can be momentous.”
–ESG Scores and Ratings: What They Are, Why They Matter
(Prioritizing long-term “value creation”? Whose values are being prioritized?)
Project ESG Scorekeepers
An industry of ESG “raters” has sprung up to rate companies’ Project ESG bona fides.
“Producers of ESG scores are varied, just as the types of ESG scores are. Nevertheless, we can categorize them based on the nature of their organization:
-NGOs. Carbon Disclosure Project is an example of an NGO that produces ESG scores.
-Financial services firms. Bloomberg, MSCI, FTSE Russell and S&P Global are examples of financial services firms that publish ESG scores.
Companies have also started producing ESG scorecards for themselves.”
The attribution of the above quote and a brief overview of the Types of ESG scores, scoring methodology, producers of ESG scores, and the users of ESG scores are at the following link:
ESG Investing 101: What Is an ESG Score? | Investing | U.S. News (usnews.com)
Every rating agency, irrespective of whether they are issue-specific, category-specific or general, uses a similar methodology.
Walking Project ESG’s Runways (or walking the plank) – three examples
Dylan Mulvaney walked Project ESG’s runway in a Bud Lite design.
Was Bud Light’s Dylan Mulvaney Decision About ESG? (forbes.com)
The boycott against Bud Light is hammering sales. Experts explain why. – ABC News (go.com)
ABINBEV_ESG_2021_Final.pdf (amazonaws.com)
Kohl’s decided that infants and children should model on Project ESG’s runway in LGBTQ+ garb.
Kohl’s becomes latest department store found selling LGBT pride clothing for infants, children – My Lesbian World
“The plummeting sales for Anheuser-Busch and the roughly $10 billion hit to Target’s market cap in over a week weren’t enough to dissuade Kohl’s from fulfilling its environmental, social and governance (ESG) score goals.”
Kohl’s feeling the heat for offering LGBTQ+ clothing for babies: ‘Another company needing Bud-Lighting’ (bizpacreview.com)LGBTQIA+ Pride Clothing: Show Love Is Love Every Day | Kohl’s (kohls.com)
Kohl’s Releases 2022 ESG Report (kohls.com)
Kohl’s ESG Report Shows Focus On LGBTQ+ Pride Support (forbes.com)
Target decided that “tuck friendly swimsuits” should be modeled on the Project ESG runway.
Target holds ’emergency’ meeting over LGBT merchandise, including ‘tuck-friendly’ swimsuits: report | Just The News
Target loses $10B following boycott calls over LGBTQ-friendly clothing (nypost.com)
Reporting & Progress | Target Sustainability & ESG
Woke Target Funding Anti-White Marxist Organization That Wants To Destroy America’s Military — The Republic Brief
Pride month, war on “woke” weighs on Corporate America’s stocks (axios.com)
As mentioned above, Project ESG scoring occurs when the contestant’s designs walk the runway. Showcasing LGBTQ+ deisgns on the main street runway is one in-your-face way to improve a Project ESG score. The bulk of Project ESG’s points, located on financial statements, are noticed by accountants and the suppliers of capital, loans and credit lines, i.e., Big Banks.
If you offer your company’s stock publicly you are impacted by accounting standards. The SEC directs that your financial statements reflect ESG disclosures to investors and the capital markets, including climate-related disclosures of climate risks among other risks.
Propelled by the planetary emergency and the drive for transparency, global sustainability reporting standards and ESG disclosure regulations are coming. Boards and C-suites should prepare now, and could find new opportunities to create value.
Tectonic shifts: How ESG is changing business, moving markets, and driving regulation
PwC’s accounting podcast RSS Feed (buzzsprout.com)
Heads Up — Do ESG Matters Affect Accounting and Financial Reporting Today? (May 26, 2021) | DART – Deloitte Accounting Research Tool
Why Not Project ESG?
Why oppose Project ESG when environmentalism, climate change, and social justice are some of the criteria on which a judgment can be made on a corporation contestant?
Why oppose Project ESG when it’s said to foster in its contestants an increasing focus on corporate purpose, accountability and operational resilience and strengthens environmental, social and governance?
Why oppose Project ESG when it’s not a competition platform but rather a platform where contestants are eliminated based on “progressive” challenges posed to them?
There’s more to Project ESG than meets the eye.
Here’s what Heartland Institute Research Fellow Jack McPherrin and others at Heartland have to say:
“At its core, ESG is a social credit scoring system that ideologically aligned elites and subservient bureaucratic authorities have developed to “reset” the global financial system to their advantage, fundamentally transforming society in the process. This is accomplished by altering traditional frameworks of evaluating businesses and assessing investment risk.
“Rather than determining the creditworthiness and value of a business or industry based upon objective measures such as profit, return on investment, consumer demand, and other material performance measures, ESG’s architects seek to judge entities based upon subjective and difficult to quantify social and environmental goals. These objectives typically have little or nothing to do with business success in the marketplace based on consumer demand expressed through their purchases.” (Emphasis mine.)
And, with regard to his well-researched paper documenting ESG’s becoming “one of the gravest threats facing the free societies of the world today.”, Jack McPherrin writes
“ESG is an insidious threat to individual freedom and economic progress, as this important paper explains. ESG efforts threaten everyone’s retirement, their ability to obtain and maintain credit, and even to have bank accounts and do business with banks. A cabal of political and financial elites are using social credit scoring in the form of ESG to enforce docile acceptance of the progressive social and economic goals they favor.” (Emphasis mine.)
One major aspect of Project ESG program that has driven many away is the matter of return on investment (ROI). Investors want a positive return from their shareholdings and not losses, e.g. KSS, TGT, BUD, produced by highly subjective elements that Project ESG scoring dictates. Investors have placed their capital into a corporation to grow their investment and not for drama and virtue signaling.
If a corporation’s CEO, CFO, COO, CIO or another suit wants to donate a portion of their huge salary to some social cause they are free to do so. They are not free to do so with my shares. They should not buy carbon offsets with my investment dollars. When I sell my shares, I will use the profit to support my social values.
I’ve told the portfolio manager overseeing my retirement funds that I do not want any of my funds invested in ESG companies. “Don’t ESG on me,” I said. She responded by saying that many of her clients have said the same thing.
The same objection to Project ESG applies for public and pension funds. Find out where your state is with ESG. Your state can impose an ESG Insurance Shareholder Restriction:
A bill to prohibit insurers or holding companies organized under state law from including ESG proposals in a proxy statement or implementing an ESG shareholder proposal.
Other aspects of Project ESG, beyond financial considerations, are being rejected:
“Nearly every ESG system includes three primary themes: climate change mitigation and associated climate and environmental goals and actions; promoting social justice and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives; and reforming corporate governance. A common fact of the many different ESG systems currently in use is that each of them contains highly subjective elements.” Jack McPherrin (See 2023-ESG-ReportvWeb-2.pdf (heartland.org) page 15 for the social metrics.)
Project ESG elites talk of stakeholders (designers) finding new opportunities to create value. The values to be created are Project ESG elite values. But I do not share those values.
I reject the notion that there is a climate change crisis. See previous posts for more.
I reject the trendy “value” of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) over the classic value of merit. I value honesty, trustworthiness, compassion, decency, respect for life, good environmental stewardship, taking responsibility for one’s behavior. Fulfilling quotas on company boards doesn’t add value to the company, the consumer or the stockholder. Fulfilling quotas only adds Project ESG points. (Note: Kamala Harris was a DEI pick for U.S. VP. Do you see any value in the pick?)
I reject Project ESG’s corporatist government design as the means to bring about the common good. Free market capitalism with individuals freely making tradeoffs works toward a common good.
I reject Project ESG’s social engineering by elite design checklists.
I reject Project ESG’s design authority – globalist dominionism that assumes positions of power and influence over all aspects of society and government that will produce a global serfdom heavily reliant on Big Brother’s social credit scoring.
I reject the basis of Project ESG’s evaluations: scientism and scientific socialism. I remind you that scientism is “the opinion that science and the scientific method are the best or only way to render truth about the world and reality”. Scientific socialism is Marxian socialism made more rigid and deterministic by Friedrich Engels. I reject social engineering and the mechanistic determinism that eliminates human contingency.
I thereby reject the notion that only physical matter and its motions are real and that everything—nature, history, even human thought—is reducible to matter moving in accordance with the same timeless “iron laws” of motion.
I reject utopian socialism.
I reject Project ESG’s dictatorial control of life’s designs. I reject severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition. Life is more than a checklist, more than a deterministic program designed to produce certain outcomes. I reject fascism.
Why do we need Project ESG? For the drama of who’s in and who’s out? To market the ideology of having wealth, power, and influence become increasingly concentrated in the hands of a select few oligarchic individuals and institutions promoting ESG and their new economic ideology of “stakeholder capitalism”?
What’s the rush to change the world? Why is there a hue and cry and John Kerry’s nasally nostrums about “fixing the climate” now? Because a few people say we need to “act now!” and their demands are constantly repeated on state media? There is no climate crisis but there certainly is a concerted effort being made by elites to change the social climate via a Great Reset. (See previous posts for more.)
Why a Black Mirror approach of unending pursuit of scientific and technological advancement?
Why do we need to change what is working? And there is much that is working. Capitalism works. Nuclear energy works. Traditional marriage and the nuclear family works. We notice the loss when what works is sidelined and corrupted by social planners who tell us there’s a better way.
And, what about Chesterton’s fence, the principle that you don’t destroy what you don’t understand. Reforms should not be made until the reasoning behind the existing state of affairs is understood. (See below for more.) One should not be rewiring society without a knowledge of history and of what circuitry works.
And there’s this: without God, the world looks to itself for a moral compass, hence Project ESG. Elites consider those under them to be lost sheep designers who need a global shepherd to direct them.
Without God, humans look to the world for drama to give meaning to their life. Many people rely on the media and social media to give meaning to their nihilistic existence. Hence, increasing paganism.
Without God, humans look to the world for identity and affirmation. Hence the vitriol and rage when gays, trannies, drag queens, and the like are not affirmed in every conversation. Project ESG makes sure that narcissism is affirmed with its DEI metrics.
Without God, Project ESG and the Great Reset look like paths forward for humanity when in reality they are paths toward the subjugation of humans under totalitarianism. The murderous history of totalitarianism will repeat itself if the elites have their way.
Project ESG judges believe they own the future and not just their future, your future. They believe they can fashion the future by refashioning you.
Like Project Runway, Project ESG is a game show with a few elitist judges determining whether you are worthy to be involved in their world. Contestants will learn whether Big banks find them Project ESG worthy of capital to survive.
“As you know in ESG, one day you’re in. And the next day, you’re out.”
*****
Elite judges? You’ll know them by their god-complex:
They Believe they are entitled to special treatment or privileges.
They are excessively controlling.
They refuse to accept criticism.
They think they have all the answers.
They feel superior or invincible.
They have a superiority complex.
They Ignore the needs of others.
They are indifferent to how their actions affect others.
Here is the over-arching perspective of one haughty elite, an Israeli named Yuval Noah Harari:
“History began when humans invented gods, and will end when humans become gods.”
Joe Allen: The First Church Of Artificial Intelligence (rumble.com)
*****
2023-ESG-ReportvWeb-2.pdf (heartland.org)
The Many Threats of ESG (Guest: Jack McPherrin) – The Heartland Institute
*****
The Parable of Chesterton’s Fence « Meridian Magazine (latterdaysaintmag.com)
The great and wise G.K. Chesterton once wrote, (from Chesterton’s 1929 book, The Thing, in the chapter entitled, “The Drift from Domesticity)”:
“In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.”
*****
Pushback:
Major League Baseball panics, tells teams to kill Pride logos (wnd.com)
Major League Baseball Strikes All Pride Jerseys (washingtonstand.com)
Students Revolt Against “Pride” Month Spirit Day at Massachusetts School; Glare at Teachers, Tear Down Signs, Wear Red, White and Blue, Chant “U.S.A. Are My Pronouns!” | The Gateway Pundit | by Kristinn Taylor | 30
Jack Posobiec: The Western Church Has Completely Surrendered The Public Square (rumble.com)
*****
Born in Chicago, I lived in the Chicago area for 69 years. Last year I moved to Indiana. I had enough of Illinois Democrats, high property taxes, insane COVID mandates, and “fat cat” Governor J.B. Pritzker.
For many years I bought the Sunday Chicago Tribune solely for the comics, the crossword and a column by John Kass.
“Until summer 2020, his opinion pieces regularly appeared on page 2 of the main news section of the Tribune, instead of on the opinion/editorial pages; this is the spot formerly occupied by Mike Royko.
. . . In June 2021, Kass took the buyout offer at the Chicago Tribune, after 38 years at the paper. In his final column, he announced his writing could continue to be found at johnkassnews.com. “Wikipedia
I read Kass’s columns because he was an objective journalist who spoke in no uncertain terms about the “Chicago way”. He wasn’t a Progressive mouthpiece like the rest of the Trib’s columnists.
(John Kass, also a lifetime Chicagoan who at one time studied film at Columbia, also recently moved to the “free state of Indiana”.)
Here’s a “Kasso” podcast about Brandon Johnson, the communist mayor of Chicago, and about Ukraine:
“On this episode, John’s younger brother Nicholas Kass, a retired American diplomat with over 30-years of experience -focused on Aegean/Eastern Mediterranean issues, takes a deep look at how we got to a war of attrition in Ukraine and whether or not this instability puts the future of NATO at risk.”
Chicago Way w/John Kass: Why the grim calculus on Ukraine spells trouble for NATO | WGN Radio 720 – Chicago’s Very Own
*****
Informed Dissent:
“While scientists justify such research as necessary for developing vaccines, President Barack Obama banned federal funding for gain-of-function research of concern in 2014, because experts had come to the consensus that it was too dangerous. However, the National Institute of Health and NIAID headed by Francis Collins and Fauci, and a major U.S. government grantee, EcoHealth Alliance, deemed their work on SARS-like viruses as not falling under the gain-of-function research of concern definitions and funded this project in China and Southeast Asia. (Emphasis mine.)
First People Sickened By COVID-19 Were Chinese Scientists At Wuhan Institute Of Virology, Say US Government Sources (substack.com)
“. . . the scope of One Health, according to a One Health Commission document, also includes communications, economics, civil society, global trade, commerce and security, public policy and regulation, research, noncommunicable diseases and much more.
Under the new treaty, the WHO will have unilateral power to make decisions about all of these areas, and its dictates will supersede and overrule any and all local, state and federal laws. In short, if the pandemic treaty is enacted, the WHO will not merely have the authority to dictate how countries prepare for and respond to pandemic threats: It will have the authority to dictate every aspect of our lives. (Emphasis mine.)
WHO Launches Digital Health Partnership With Europe | USSA News | The Tea Party’s Front Page.
New Cleveland Clinic Study Confirms Negative Efficacy of Covid Vaccine: Boosted 33% MORE Likely to Get Covid – The Daily Sceptic
This is how totalitarians break you:
Tucker:
Tucker just spent 13 minutes giving the best explanation for why Trump should be president… – Revolver News
Someone posted this on social media:
We are the unhealthiest population of all time. Here’s why.
1. Industrial seed oils replacing real animal and fruit fats (tallow, suet, lard, butter, ghee, olive, coconut, avocado) as the primary fat used in 99.9% of store-bought and restaurant food products.
2. Vaccines convincing the public that herd immunity was conferred by mass vaccination instead of natural immunity in the backdrop of proliferating global disease spurred on by the industrialization and travel (globalization) of the 21st century.
3. Environmental and food estrogens (xenoestrogens, phytoestrogens) entering the human population through water (birth control), clothing (polyester, etc), and food derivatives (unfermented soybean products like oils, fillers, and mylks).
4. Social engineering promulgated by governments and the ruling class in order to condition the world to globohomo: a flat, homogeneous, global serfdom heavily reliant on big government and fully prepared for a massively consolidated western corporatist government.
😷 Lockdown 2.0 Is Coming Soon: 😵💫 Are We Already Conditioned for Another One? – YouTube
Rate this:
Filed under 2023 current events, Communism, cultural Marxism, Economics, Globalism, Political Commentary, Progressivism, social commentary, social engineering, socialism, totalitarianism, World Economic Forum Tagged with Build Back Better, cultural Marxism, ESG, Globalism, Great Reset, New World Order, progressivism, social engineering