“Yet across the gulf of space, intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic, regarded our planet with envious eyes, and slowly and surely drew their plans against us.” ~ H. G. Wells; The War of the Worlds
In the year 1898, H. G. Wells published his science fiction novel The War of the Worlds. But, you may be more familiar with the 1938 Orson Welles radio broadcast that caused so much trouble here in the U. S., or one of the many movies based upon the Wells novel. For me it was the 1953 film by Bryon Haskin that I remember most clearly, and scared the living be-Jesus out of me at the time.
You may recall the plot; I’ll give you the short version here. Martians invade the earth from, where else—Mars of course. The Martians arrive in meteor like vehicles smashing to earth unharmed. Their machines rise out of their craters as if Phoenix’s, their bodies much like some stingray beast, but instead of a long tail they exhibit a neck like structure with a head that extrudes a death ray capable of vaporizing any person or thing. The threat ultimately ends when the Martians die of earthly diseases for which they are not immune.
Wells was writing from a scientific point of view popular in his day, but let us assume for a moment that Wells was writing instead about a more earthly war, a conflict of World Views, rather than about a war of extraterrestrials and the destruction they bring about on the world as he knew it. It is far easier to see clearly a threat posed by extraterrestrials invading the earth, or some other armed invader like the Nazi invasion of Poland or France, for example. It is vastly more difficult to see as a threat a World View that comes from within, or from across the Atlantic in the form of immigrants, by those who do not share the values of the in-place World View of a country and people. Perhaps the threat comes in a more stealth form like “Change You Can Believe In” or a slower moving “invasion” in the name of progress by “progressives.” None the less, the threat remains the same and is just as destructive! And these invaders are not likely to die of some earthly bacteria or virus for which they do not have immunity thus saving the day!
To better know what “change” or “progress” truly means, one must first know something about and better understand the World View of the of the person or persons promoting change or progress! The adage tells us that words have meanings and meanings have words, but both words and meaning can be perverted by communication skilled persons with hidden and unspoken agendas skillfully choosing their words so as to appeal to our traditional understandings. Another adage tells us that actions speak louder than words. Both adages being true, one must listen closely, question boldly, and watch for actions with even greater sensitivity! When political leaders advocate change or progress, ask these and other question: Is personal liberty increased, or diminished? Is governance by the people–for the people dispersed, or centralized? Are Traditional Values themselves valued and supported, or replaced wholesale by something “new” and more “modern” more applicable to our times?
While the numbered years of the calendar have changed from ancient times to this very day, the fundamental nature of mankind remains essentially the same; we still deal with fundamental questions of good and evil, man’s inhumanity to man, and the question of personal self control and personal self governance as opposed to rule by kings, a dictator, or a higher human authority of some centralized body making decisions for us for our own good. All sorts of evils and inhumanities have been committed in the name of progress and change by self appointed and sometimes elected persons who just know better than we!
In the opinion of this writer there are still but four major World Views, but with some variations. These are:
1. Traditional Communism – the former USSR
State-ism, bridges elements of Capitalism and Communism; Current best example, Communist China
2. Traditional Humanism
Socialism – most of Europe, by example
Globalism – a form of Socialism incorporating Traditional Marxism and State-ism – Best example, George Soros’ Border-less Society, a New World Order.
3. Traditional Islam and Shari’ah
Muslim Brotherhood – traditional Islam and Shari’ah with a sprinkling of Socialism and Marxism – possible example may be the new Egypt
4. Traditional Christian World View – Still, for the most part, the best example is the USA, but changing rapidly!
In future posts each of the four major World Views will be reviewed in some detail. If one is to know what impact the adoption of, or invasion of one World View over another might be (or the mix of World Views might be) one must first know what each World View is comprised of. It is to the end, one of understanding that we write with the hope that with information better judgments and decisions might be the outcome for us all.
D. M. E.