Replies

In “The Ruling Class: How They Corrupted America and What We Can Do About It,” Codevilla, emeritus professor of international relations at Boston University, argues that America’s real divide is between Americans who still worship the supernatural Triune God who created man in His spiritual image and a class of anti-supernatural evolutionary naturalists (i.e., arrogant gun grabbers) and their theological counterparts who dominate both political parties, academe, Hollywood, the courts, science, media and certain seminaries. They preach from pulpits, run big business, our economy and the country's major institutions and imagine themselves entitled to reshape an America that they regard as composed of dangerous (gun-owning) un-evolved subhuman hominids.

The Ruling Class believe that science and evolution trump the Revelation of God and the Bible, most importantly, the Genesis account of creation ex nihilo. They are not created but rather the evolved products of evolution, hence they are science’s authoritative enlightened priests and god-men who pray to themselves,

"... as saviors of the planet and as shapers of mankind in their own image.." (The Ruling Class: How They Corrupted America and What We Can Do About It, p. xix)

By elevating science and evolution above the Triune God and the Genesis account of creation ex nihilo, they've stupidly mutilated their own personhood as well as the unique definition of man on which our Constitution is grounded. For fifteen hundred years, Christendom and then later Protestant America had followed St. Augustine (AD 354-430) in affirming that all men are three part (mind, body, soul) image-bearers of the transcendent Triune God (Gen. 1:27). This historically unique view of man is the foundation of our Constitutional rights The Genesis account of creation ex nihilo reveals that man is a person because created in the spiritual image of the One God in three Persons. Man was created directly by God with a superhuman intelligence and original nature from which Adam, hence all of us, fell away and to which we are called back. This historically unique view of man is the foundation of our Constitutional rights, including the right to own firearms.

How did the utterly stupid dehumanizing Ruling Class attitude replace the Founding generation’s belief that “all men are created equal” because the spiritual image bearers of the living, personal Holy Triune God?

Codevilla writes that by the 1820s,

“… J. C. Calhoun was reading in the best London journals that different breeds of animals and plants produce inferior or superior results, slave owners were citing the Negroes’ deficiencies to argue that they should remain slaves indefinitely. Lots of others were reading Ludwig Feuerbach’s rendition of Hegelian philosophy, according to which biblical injunctions reflect the fantasies of alienated human beings or, in the young Karl Marx’s formulation, that ethical thought is “superstructural” to material reality. By 1853, when Sen. John Pettit of Ohio called “all men are created equal” “a self-evident lie,” much of America’s educated class had already absorbed the “scientific” notion (which Darwin only popularized) that man is the product of chance mutation and natural selection of the fittest. Accordingly, by nature, superior men subdue inferior ones as they subdue lower beings or try to improve them as they please….As the 19th century ended, the educated class’s religious fervor turned to social reform: they were sure that because man is a mere part of evolutionary nature, man could be improved, and that they, the most highly evolved of all, were the improvers.” (ibid)

As their numbers grew and their narcissism inflated,

“… so did their distaste for common Americans. Believing itself “scientific,” this Progressive class sought to explain its differences from its neighbors in “scientific” terms. The most elaborate of these attempts was Theodor Adorno’s widely acclaimed The Authoritarian Personality (1948). It invented a set of criteria by which to define personality traits, ranked these traits and their intensity in any given person on what it called the “F scale” (F for fascist), interviewed hundreds of Americans, and concluded that most who were not liberal Democrats were latent fascists. This way of thinking about non-Progressives filtered down to college curricula. In 1963-64 for example, I was assigned Herbert McCloskey’s Conservatism and Personality (1958) at Rutgers’s Eagleton Institute of Politics as a paradigm of methodological correctness. The author had defined conservatism in terms of answers to certain questions, had defined a number of personality disorders in terms of other questions, and run a survey that proved “scientifically” that conservatives were maladjusted ne’er-do-well ignoramuses. “(ibid)

While self-mutilated evolutionists view conservatives as "maladjusted ne’er-do-well ignoramuses," Christians who affirm and defend creation ex nihilo, hence the personhood of man are ignorant, anti-science fundamentalists. According to one prominent "self-mutilated" evolutionary theist, not only are they a cause of embarrassment to fashionably-correct, scientifically enlightened Christians, but also guilty of harming Christianity.