Book Sale

Monday, 3 March 2025

Women: Prioritize Your Home And Kids

 




Vox Day has written quite a bit on his Substack in recent times about how women like to sabotage other women they are in competition with. He gave examples of how women will judge each other when one of their friends is losing weight, through to women encouraging their pretty friends to cut their hair short, or change their look in some other negative way, and other similarly bad advice. His Sigma Game Substack is pretty insightful and many of my readers would already be aware of it, if not check it out on Substack.

This article, to me, is another clear example of women seeking to sabotage other women, dressed up as educational concerns,

“‘Wag day’: Teachers slam mum over four-day school week

Teachers have hit back at an influencer who said she wants to ditch the traditional five-day school week and give her daughter a “wag day a week”.

A mum-of-three has sparked a heated debate on social media after revealing she wants to take her daughter out of school one day a week.

Montana’s five-year-old daughter has just started school in a coastal town along Victoria’s Great Ocean Road, and instead of going along with the traditional five-day schooling routine, the influencer is examining the merits of “one wag day a week”.

“Our school where we’re at, for the first four weeks they have one day off on a Wednesday and I kind of want to keep that a thing,” she explained in a video.

“I love our Wednesdays, I love not rushing anywhere, I love the extra time I get to spend with my daughter. Her being gone so long every single day at school five days a week for the rest of her life, it just feels, I don’t know, so uncomfortable to me, so unnatural.”…

…The statement sparked a fair bit of criticism with one person calling it “arrogant and selfish”, while others said “you’re just having a hard time letting go of your daughter” and “that’s what the weekends are for”. Many others sympathised with the idea, noting that five days is a lot for small children.

Partial school attendance can be problematic for students for both academic and social reasons, according to education professionals.”[1]

What kind of nutjob calls these women “arrogant and selfish” for wanting to have more time with their kids in the home? The kind of women who have bought into the now decades long propaganda that the government or private schools should raise their kids, and they have sunken so much investment into that system, that they feel judged by anyone who wants to do things otherwise.

These comments are especially revealing,

“The idea is wonderful but the way schools are set up don’t make this very successful unfortunately,” another teacher commented below the post.

A third teacher wrote, “The main issue is she will start to miss out on a lot of social interactions and get left behind. I see it all the time with children that take one or more days off a week — they start to get left behind socially.”[2]

Kids benefit greatly from time spent with their parents, especially their mums in their younger years. The idea that a child spending more time with her mum is going backwards socially is so nonsensical that one must have believed a lot of pre-taught propaganda to even countenance such a thought. In the Scriptures “youth” and “fool” are often synonyms, especially in the Proverbs. Children are often socially disadvantaged precisely because they spend most of their time with other people at their own level, rather than intense periods of time with those far ahead of them which they can learn from.

These comments from mothers who have already started to keep their kids home more are really encouraging though,

“I did this growing up and I’m so thankful my parents did!” another wrote. “My [day] off was my creative day.”

A mother who has a partially enrolled child shared, “I actually am not understanding why people are [losing] their minds over this … one day a week [at] home is what me and a friend did last year.”[3]

But the best part of the article is what the mother whom the article is based around says in response to her critics,

“In response to criticism sparked by her video, Montana asked her followers to remember that she is “a mother craving a slower pace, more time with her babies, one who won’t give in to what society deems ‘acceptable’ or ‘normal’”.

“And if that makes [you] uncomfortable? Remember it’s not your family, or your kids.”[4]

You tell them. This is something I love to see. A mum fighting against the culture to be more in the lives of her children. The norm in our culture for some time has been mothers increasingly abandoning their kids, and then creating all sorts of rationalizations that what they are doing is not only not wrong, it is necessary and good. You can see these women represented in this article, who are criticising this young woman for wanting to hold onto her kids more. I have addressed these types of women before, click here to read one example. Women are created, by that I mean specially designed, not only to bear children but to rear children. But the vast and great resources of most institutions in our society for decades now have been directed at women to convince them otherwise. Finally, though, this propaganda appears to be breaking in significant numbers. Praise be to God.

And this woman has identified one of the best advantages of keeping the children at home to educate them, “a slower pace, more time with her babies…” This is the secret joy of home-schoolers that they will tell you about if you ask them. Their lives are actually simpler, not more complicated. This young woman has not gone all the way to doing fulltime home-schooling. But I would encourage her, and others like her, to consider it. She will find many of the advantages she has already experienced increase.

Most of the women who would criticize a young woman like this for wanting to have her kids at home more, will be harbouring some kind of regret that they did not do this themselves. They will be harbouring regret that they are stuck paying off a house, and two expensive cars, both they and their husband, or boyfriend, or whoever, need to work to pay off, and that they have barely any time to just chill and relax with their kids. As one foolish person says in the article, “That’s what weekends are for.” You poor sap, you don’t have to follow the busyness of everyone else. Dont you know this? It is joy when you step outside that lifestyle and actively choose not to pursue the constantly full schedule and all the extra-curricular activities that the busyness worshippers bow before.

At the end of the day, what is the one thing most people say towards the end, “I wish I had more time with my family.” The truth is you do right now have more time, make use of it. Bring the kids home as much as you can, educate full-time in the home if you can. You won’t regret it, not if you go about it wisely at least.

List of References

[1] Biance Soldani, 2025, https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/parenting/school-life/wag-day-teachers-slam-mum-over-fourday-school-week/news-story/a48a7966bbfc53af8e2dc9ba7e1012ff?amp

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

Saturday, 1 March 2025

The Chamberlain Myth

 




One of the most persistent World War 2 Myths is the Chamberlain Myth, or Chamberlain falsehood. You've heard it, we all have. This is the idea that WW2 effectively happened because Chamberlain appeased Hitler. Appeasers are the problem, is the lesson we are told.

This is false. In fact it is perniciously so and it's not an accident that this falsehood is wheeled out whenever the US, or Europe and Britain, want to go to war. This narrative was created to justify a continued war-footing of Western democracies and to cover over warmongering and pretend our countries only fight because we have to... that we have no choice. And most people have just taken it as gospel truth.

I once believed this myth myself, and like many other people in our society, I would use it to make points from time to time, here is an example from 2021, during the Covid crisis,

“Nevilles - my new name for the silly Christian conservatives who say they don't want to be a part of a Culture War.

Derived from Neville Chamberlain - the guy who thought you could appease Nazi's and Communists and avoid war. He was wrong.

Christians have no choice but to recognize the world is at war with the followers of Jesus. Hiding from it, refusing to engage with it, just makes you a Neville. Our weapons are not of flesh and blood, but of the spirit, the word and truth of God and we wage it peacefully as advocates of the truth. But we have no choice but to engage, the king of this world has declared war.

Rev. 12:17 - "17 Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus."

My overall point in this statement still holds, conservative Christians are foolish for thinking you can avoid the culture wars forever. But I would never use Chamberlain as this kind of example again, like so many of us do.

What people forget is that it was Chamberlain's government that gave a war guarantee to Poland. And Chamberlain who declared war against Germany. It was THAT guarantee to Poland that made sure that a war in eastern Europe would become a world war. Foreign entanglements are the real cause of WW2.

If Chamberlain had never have given that guarantee, Poland would have given in to Germany's demands to return German speaking regions (that were only recently taken off them). War in Eastern Europe still would have happened, as both Hitler and Stalin were eyeing off taking the same land, Hitler looked to the East, Stalin looked to the West. But instead of being an Eastern European war, Britain made sure it was a World War. They guaranteed it.

You might say, but they had to guarantee Poland, no one else would fight for them. But Britain's guarantee destroyed Poland. 100%. It gave Poland a false sense of security. Britain was a Naval power, with a relatively inconsequential land army (compared to France, Germany or the USSR). It never could have protected Poland. But the guarantee gave Poland the false idea that if they refused to relinquish disputed lands (that had been German for centuries) they would be protected. Instead, they were ravished first by the Germans, and then by the USSR. Britain hanged them out to dry. It wrote cheques it could not and never intended to cash, and the Polish people suffered dearly for this false assurance. They would have been better off taking their chances negotiating with Germany.

War was inevitable in eastern Europe. Hitler, the madman, and Stalin, the wannabe world conqueror, were both eyeing off the same land. What made it a World War was foreign entanglements.

The kind of foreign entanglements that George Washington warned about, and Europe specialises in. European powers did it unceasingly. Major powers guaranteeing minor powers military backing are what caused the war to escalate, and it they are what caused WW1, and they are behind the Ukrainian conflict, and virtually every other major European war. Ukraine never would have increased its shelling in the Donbass, which provoked Russia, if it did not have military equipment and assurances from the United States and Europe. Foreign entanglements are one of the great causes of war. Look at assurances from the US give Israel the confidence to go to war with virtually all their neighbours.

Foreign entanglements are the real cause of World War 2. War mongers love them. That's why you've been lied to about the cause of the biggest war in history. So, the warmongers can paint themselves as just reluctant fighters who would prefer peace. But foreign entanglements are part of their game to keep the war chain rolling. It's big business, it's also the European way.

 

One People of God

 




There is one people of God. One and one only. Centered around Jesus:

John 11:51-52, "51 He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, 52 and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad."

Why must Jesus die? "...to gather into ONE the children of God scattered abroad..." Who are these people one with? All from Jesus' nation who believed in him. In other words the children of God, or the people of God, are only those who trust in the work of the Messiah, who is Jesus Christ of Nazareth.  

As Paul writes Galatians 3 says, "28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise." There is no doubt that Paul is building on the exact kind of statements of Jesus that we just read from John 11. Though, of course, Jesus revealed this to Paul directly, not through the other Apostles.

Maybe if this passage in Galatians 3 had not been twisted to say women can be preachers, more Christians would recognize that it is actually about how many peoples of God there are: One: "for you are all one in Christ Jesus..." "to gather into one the children of God scattered abroad..." It is fascinating the extent to which false teaching can reach. Galatians 3 is not about gender equality, it is about access to Jesus, or who can be the full fledged people of God. The answer? All who have faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Everything else is just confusion.