Wednesday, August 30, 2017

Judgment on Houston and Warning to America?


Judgment on Houston and Warning to America?

By Julio Severo
Hurricane Harvey has caused massive destruction in Houston, Texas, and it has already caused billions of dollars in insured losses in Texas as rain continues to pour on Houston and damages rise by the day.
According to the Texan newspaper MySanAntonio, “Preliminary estimates place total losses at more than $100 billion.”
A CNBC headline said that if Harvey’s uninsured losses top $150 billion, the whole U.S. economy would hurt.
Four months ago, in his first visit to Saudi Arabia, President Donald Trump rejoiced that he had sold over $100 billion in military equipment to the Saudis. Trump rejoiced that the Saudi purchase would create thousands of jobs in the U.S.
Yet, actually there was nothing to rejoice over. Saudi Arabia is the main sponsor of worldwide Islamic terrorism. To sell arms to the Saudis is to arm Islamic terrorists, including against defenseless Christian communities.
Saudi-backed ISIS has decimated Christian communities in Syria and Iraq. Saudi Arabia has inflicted untold suffering on Christians in the Middle East. And America has acted as a nation not caring about the suffering of Christians because of Saudi actions.
In 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit destructively Louisiana. Months before the hurricane, Rev. Chuck Pierce travelled to that area under God’s direction. Then he lifted his hands, prayed and released “God’s judgment” as directed by God. Allegedly, the judgment came because Bush’s foreign policy was pressuring Israel.
I do not know if the $100 billion losses in Texas and the Saudi purchase of $100 billion in U.S. arms have spiritual connections, but it is a huge coincidence.
Other “coincidence” was reported by Scott Lively, author of “The Pink Swastika,” who said:
“A week before the natural disaster of ‘Biblical proportions’ in Houston we experienced the heavenly portent of a total solar eclipse that occurred only over America and spanned the nation diagonally from coast to coast. Solar eclipses are associated with judgement on the Gentile world just as Lunar eclipses portend judgement on the Hebrews. The eclipse occurred at the opening of the 40 Days of Repentance in the Hebrew calendar on Elul 1. Houston is the largest Christian dominated city in the United States to have elected an open homosexual mayor. Homosexuality is the only sin consistently associated with natural disasters and God's judgment in the Bible. I think all this adds up to a special and urgent warning for America to repent.”
Christianity is the most prevalently practiced religion in Houston (73%). Lakewood Church in Houston, led by pastor Joel Osteen, is the largest church in the United States.
Even so, Houston was one of the largest cities in the United States to elect an open homosexual mayor.
If the destruction of Sodom over homosexuality was a sign of warning, could be the “destruction of Houston” a sign of warning for America to repent from making sodomy nationally and internationally great?
It could also be a sign for America to repent from selling arms to Islamic terrorists and from not caring about their Christian victims?
Portuguese version of this article: Juízo sobre Houston e aviso aos Estados Unidos?
Recommended Reading:

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

Amid Crisis in Brazil, Evangelicals Emerge as the Main Conservative Power


Amid Crisis in Brazil, Evangelicals Emerge as the Main Conservative Power

In the world’s largest Catholic country, the evangelical movement could select Brazil’s next president.

By Julio Severo
Introduction. The American Left is keeping an eye on the increasing influence of conservative evangelicals in Brazil. “The Nation,” the oldest continuously published weekly magazine in the United States since 1865, produced this month a special article, titled “Amid Crisis in Brazil, the Evangelical Bloc Emerges as a Political Power,” about the political power of evangelicals in Brazil.
It is very important to see what “The Nation” is saying, not only because it is the oldest magazine in the U.S., but also because it is progressive and left-wing and it is worried about the Brazilian evangelical influence. If the American Left, which is the most powerful Left in the world, is worried about evangelicals in Brazil, it is an excellent sign for Brazilian evangelicals.
The following article, even though edited, corrected, adapted and “conservatized” by my view as a Brazilian evangelical insider, is largely based on the article of “The Nation”:
Although Brazil remains the world’s largest Roman Catholic country, in recent decades a massive growth among evangelicals has challenged Catholic hegemony. In 1970, the percentage of Brazilian Catholics stood at 90 percent; today, it barely clears 50 percent. During that same time span, the percentage of evangelicals has risen from 5 percent to roughly 30 percent, thanks to the aggressive evangelistic outreach efforts by Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal (charismatic) churches. Across the country, evangelical leaders are struggling to keep up with the growth of their flock. Abandoned shopping centers, X-rated theaters, and strip clubs have all become unlikely places of worship.
Such a radical transformation in Brazil’s religious landscape has given rise to discussions about the emergence of a “Brazilian Christian right” — a movement similar to the American Christian right in its ability to reshape politics. Evangelical leaders already played a crucial role in former Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff’s ouster, and their influence appears set to increase for years to come. It was Eduardo Cunha, the speaker of the Chamber of Deputies (the lower house of the Brazilian Congress) and one of Brazil’s most prominent evangelicals, who led the drive to impeach Rousseff for moving funds from several state accounts to conceal a budget deficit in the run up to the 2014 elections.
Although this was a violation of the law, the two previous presidents resorted to the same sort of budgetary tinkering without any consequences. “Cunha staged a constitutional coup,” according to Paulo Iotti, a constitutional expert at the Group of Lawyers for Sexual and Gender Diversity, a São Paulo–based homosexualist NGO. But in a fatality of destiny, Cunha himself was found guilty of corruption, money laundering, and illegally sending money abroad.
In March, a judge sentenced him to 15 years in prison, one of the stiffest sentences ever given to a public official in Brazil. Rousseff and former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who have been embroiled in bigger scandals and corruption, have never been sent to prison. They have been completely free. Cunha was the first major casualty of “Operation Car Wash,” an anti-corruption dragnet that has so far ensnared some 60 percent of Brazil’s Congress as well as President Temer.
Cunha should be a cautionary tale for anyone harboring the illusion that the political rise of evangelicals will fix the ills of Brazilian politics. Corruption in Brazil is endemic since its discovery 500 years ago. It is a historic evil thought incurable. The Brazilian government has fully inherited the Portuguese system of pillage on Brazilians. The Catholic Portuguese crown was notorious for looting Brazil and its riches, especially through abusive taxes, and Brazilians are historically known for evading such government pillage.
The expansion of Protestant evangelism didn’t happen overnight. Protestants first landed in Brazil in the 19th century, with the establishment by European immigrants of mainline Protestant denominations, like the Presbyterians, Lutherans, and Anglicans. Classic Pentecostal churches, such as the Assemblies of God, soon followed. A second wave of Protestants arrived in the 1940s with the advent of the Foursquare Gospel Church, imported from California by preachers Harold and Mary Williams. From its base in São Paulo, Foursquare quickly became one of the fastest growing churches in Brazil. Key to their appeal was revival events inspired by the evangelical campaigns of Billy Graham. Reminiscing about the early days of his evangelism in Brazil, Harold Williams noted that while attending a Graham crusade it dawned on him that “Brazilians love circuses. I think they would be drawn to a circus tent for a revival.”
A third and final wave came in late 1970s and 1980s with the rise of the neo-Pentecostal movement, including many evangelical fellowships (comunidades evangélicas). U.S. televangelist Rex Humbard, whose TV programs were broadcast in Brazil since 1975, is thought to have had a decisive role in general evangelism and expansion of the neo-Pentecostal movement in Brazil. “The 700 Club,” presented by Rev. Pat Robertson, who prayed in the Brazilian TV with his gift of revelation, was also a powerful inspiration.
Universal Church of the Kingdom of God (UCKG), founded by Bishop Edir Macedo in 1977, is an exceptional case, because it embraces practices rejected by all the other neo-Pentecostal churches. UCKG founder openly supports abortion and his denomination rejects prophecies and revelations as “demonic,” teaching that God only speaks through the Bible and nothing else. UCKG, whose founder lives in the United States, adhered to a pro-abortion and cessationist stance very common in the PCUSA, the largest Presbyterian denomination in the U.S.
Just as PCUSA supported left-wing Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, UCKG supported left-wing Lula and Rousseff in Brazil.
There is no shortage of explanations for why Protestant evangelism is thriving. The polling data suggest “a more personal connection with God,” a more active worshiping experience, and a church with a greater emphasis on moral values. Another school of thought emphasizes the more democratic structures of Protestant churches relative to those of the Catholic Church.
Like the rise of Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority in the early 1980s, which ushered in the emergence of the American Christian right, Brazilian evangelical leaders have entered the political fray motivated by a sense of moral outrage. These leaders point to the moral decay that has taken place in Brazil under Lula and Rousseff’s Workers’ Party (PT). They condemn the rise in secularism; the advent of gay “marriage,” imposed by the Federal Supreme Court in 2011; the growing acceptance of abortion, although illegal; and the ubiquity of pornography. Their preferred venue for decrying Brazil’s descent into sin is the March for Jesus, an annual gathering that draws hundreds of thousands to downtown São Paulo. Held just ahead of São Paulo’s famed gay pride parade, the event showcases an evangelical agenda dominated by opposition to the gay agenda and abortion.
In constructing their advocacy against moral decline, Brazilian evangelicals take their cues directly from the American evangelical conservatism, a process facilitated by the many transnational ties linking the American and Brazilian evangelical communities. By the late 1980s, according to The New York Times, there were already 2,800 Protestant missionaries from the US in Brazil, and “dozens” of different US-based churches and missions. California-based Trinity Broadcast Network (TBN), the world’s largest religious broadcaster, reaches 220 Brazilian cities in 23 Brazilian states, covering 45 million people.
With American influence, the Brazilian branch of Bethany House Publishers published in 1998 for the first time in Brazil a book addressing the challenges of the homosexual militancy. Titled “O Movimento Homossexual” (The Homosexual Movement), the pioneering book, written by Julio Severo, was based on U.S. homosexualist actions that could be copied in Brazil — and eventually they were actually copied.
Severo’s conservatism is a result of his experiences with U.S. conservative missionaries, including TV shows of Rex Humbard and Pat Robertson, and books of U.S. conservative evangelical authors. His book was distributed freely among members of the Brazilian Congress in 2004. Bethany in Brazil was founded by American missionaries.
Severo delivered the opening speech at the first conference of the Evangelical Parliamentary Caucus in Brasilia, the Brazilian capital city, in 2004. He addressed the multifaceted threats of the homosexual movement. The conference was filled with evangelical congressmen and the most prominent evangelical leaders in Brazil.
The first magazine of the Evangelical Parliamentary Caucus also featured an article by Julio Severo against the homosexual agenda.
In 2012, Silas Malafaia, the most prominent Assemblies of God leader in Brazil, published in Brazil the Portuguese version of Louis P. Sheldon’s “The Agenda: The Homosexual Plan to Change America.” Sheldon’s book was also distributed freely among members of the Brazilian Congress.
Also significant is that in the last two decades several American Christian groups, many of the veterans of the American culture wars, have set up shop in Brazil. A notable arrival is televangelist Pat Robertson’s American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), with the establishment of a Brazilian subsidiary, the Brazilian Center for Law and Justice, connected to Silas Malafaia. The ACLJ, a right-wing alternative to the far-left American Civil Liberties Union, is famous for upholding a biblical definition of marriage (it helped draft the Defense of Marriage Act) and for defending the First Amendment rights of Christians.
Despite their shared origins and mutual admiration, the Brazilian evangelical community is not a carbon copy of the American one. The American Christian right is remarkable for its ecumenism with the Catholic Church and the Unification Church, founded by Rev. Moon, who presented himself as a new “messiah” to fulfill what Jesus Christ was not supposedly able to fulfill. The reason for such union was that Moon was anti-Marxist and conservative. But such ecumenism is hardly the case in Brazil, where evangelicals are at war with the Catholic Church over the issue of “Catholic privilege.” Evangelical churches want the government to grant them the same tax breaks and benefits traditionally given only to the Catholic Church, such as support for Catholic schools, monasteries, and seminaries. Many Brazilian evangelicals also aggressively target Catholic doctrines, as Mary’s worship, as their main evangelistic concern.
The key vehicle for the evangelicals’ participation in politics is the Evangelical Parliamentary Caucus, arguably the most effective lobby in the Brazilian Congress. Its growth mirrors that of the evangelical movement. In 1985, the evangelical caucus had 17 members; by 2006, membership had grown to 57, or 12.5 percent of the 513-seat Chamber of Deputies. By 2014, 93 members or 15 percent of the Chamber of Deputies and five members of the Senate (a body with 81 members) belonged to the caucus. These percentages become more meaningful when considering the fragmentation of the Brazilian party system. The leading party usually commands less than 20 percent of the Congress. Most of the evangelical caucus’s members come from Pentecostal denominations. Most of them, if not all, are “pastors” or “bishops” of their respective denominations. Research suggests that having the title of “pastor” attached to your name enhances the political fortunes of the candidates “by making the religious connection more visible.”
The evangelical caucus has been the only power in the Brazilian Congress to block the homosexual agenda. Evangelical leaders argue pro-homosexuality bills grant special rights to gay supremacists and harm religion freedom, such as the liberty of pastors to quote Bible verses that condemn homosexuality. While the Brazilian Left copies the American Left in its efforts to impose the homosexual agenda in Brazil, the evangelical caucus has been encouraged by Malafaia, Severo and others to copy the American evangelical conservatism.
With general elections scheduled for next year, a stampede of candidates is already jockeying for the presidency, and evangelical voters could end up crowning the winner. But this will hinge on the capacity of the evangelical community to rally around a single candidate. Unlike American evangelicals, Brazilian evangelicals are not wedded to any particular party. During the last election, for instance, the evangelical vote went to the evangelical Marina Silva, a former environmental minister in the Lula administration running under the banner of the Brazilian Socialist Party, who came in third.
Pentecostals are generally conservative on abortion and homosexuality, but Silva is a special case. She was converted to the Assemblies of God, but her ideological roots in the Catholic Church, especially the Liberation Theology, were never abandoned. Even so, she was mistakenly portrayed in the U.S. evangelical media in 2014 as “conservative.”
Silva will likely make another run, as will her old boss, Lula, assuming he can successfully appeal the graft conviction that could send him to jail for nearly 10 years. Another possible contender is Sergio Moro, the federal judge in charge of Operation Car Wash, who actually sentenced Lula. Yet another serious candidate is João Doria, the millionaire media mogul and former star of Brazil’s “The Apprentice,” who last year shocked the political world by getting himself elected mayor of São Paulo, South America’s largest city.
Doria is very similar to Trump, having the same liberal history and both were stars in “The Apprentice.” The evangelical worry is that he is not against the homosexual agenda, just as Trump has not opposed the homosexual agenda. U.S. embassies under Trump continue promoting this dark agenda, even though he had issued, under evangelical pressure, an order barring transgender soldiers in the military. Malafaia and other Pentecostal leaders think that they can exert the same pressure on a possible President Doria.
Another possible candidate for evangelicals could be Congressman Jair Bolsonaro, a right-wing politician who compared same-sex “marriage” to pedophilia. Bolsonaro, who is known for praising the military rule in Brazil, is admired among evangelicals for his opposition to the homosexual agenda. But he is best known for his uncontrolled words and temper. Even though he was baptized in Jordan River, in Israel, in 2016 in a political stunt to signal a conversion to evangelicalism, time has been enough to disprove it. There is no sign of an “evangelical” Bolsonaro and the Pentecostal minister who baptized him, Pastor Everaldo, is a shrewd political strategist. Since the “evangelical” baptism, their relationship and stunt soured and both have parted ways. Among evangelicals, Bolsonaro’s main negative point is his strange connections to the Brazilian Rasputin, Olavo de Carvalho, a self-exiled Brazilian immigrant in the United States who has consistently advocated the dark idea that evangelicals, especially the Protestant America, invented an alleged “myth” of the Inquisition, which tortured and murdered Jews and Protestants. For Carvalho, the Inquisition was good and necessary, a real human-rights “champion.” He became notorious in Brazil in the 1980s for his astrological activities and for having founded the first Brazilian school of astrologers.
Whether Doria or Bolsonaro, both Catholic, could find support among evangelicals remains unclear. Yet, if the American experience with Trump is any guide, Doria in his entrepreneurship and Bolsonaro in his opposition to the homosexual agenda are eligible to receive evangelical support. If a Pentecostal candidate emerges, Doria and Bolsonaro will have no chance. But whatever happens, a clear paradox is already on display: In a country famous for its hedonistic culture, its Catholic syncretism with African religions and its sex-charged Carnivals, Christian conservatism has among evangelicals its most powerful representation.
With information from The Nation.
Recommended Reading:

Wednesday, August 23, 2017

Coincidence or Warning? USS John S. McCain Damaged in a Collision on the Same Day as the Solar Eclipse


Coincidence or Warning? USS John S. McCain Damaged in a Collision on the Same Day as the Solar Eclipse

By Julio Severo
Was it just a “coincidence” that a destroyer named USS “John S. McCain” was severely damaged on the exact same day as a great eclipse covered the United States?
Solar eclipses have long been believed to be warnings that judgment is coming upon a nation, and this eclipse was the first in all of U.S. history to be seen in its fullness only within the borders of the U.S.
But the eclipse was not the only historic event happening on August 21, 2017. Something almost impossible happened in the same day: USS John S McCain, a guided-missile destroyer, collided with the merchant vessel Alnic MC, a 600-foot oil tanker.
USS John McCain
The McCain suffered substantial damage and several sailors perished.
If such tragic collision had happened one time, it would have been strange, because U.S. destroyers are fully equipped to detect and face enemy ships. So a collision with a non-military ship is virtually impossible.
Yet, in a short period of two months, this is the second time this kind of collision happens. In the early hours of June 17, 2017, the USS Fitzgerald crashed into a merchant ship, leaving seven sailors dead. The U.S. destroyer was severely damaged.
One collision may be a “coincidence.” Two collisions may be a “warning,” especially because the U.S. Navy is the most powerful in the world, capable of facing formidable enemies. Two collisions with unarmed civil ships are inexcusable.
With its sophisticated military protection, how could a U.S. destroyer be unprotected?
God said in Ezekiel, “I will tear down the wall… When the wall falls, they will be destroyed by it. Then you will know that I am the LORD.”
Wall is military protection. God has the power to destroy the walls (the military protection) of an unrepentant nation.
God can grant protection and he can breach and even destroy protection.
The “walls” of the USS Fitzgerald and the USS John S. McCain were startlingly breached.
Is there an initial spiritual warning in the collision and “breach of wall” of the McCain?
Of all the members of the U.S. Congress, Senator John McCain has long been considered the most aggressive advocate for U.S. military interventionism in other nations.
He is an aggressive anti-Russian warmonger funded by George Soros. Even though he is a Republican and former Republican presidential candidate, he is the Democratic Party’s favorite Republican. He is also the neocon most loved by Republican and Democratic neocons.
McCain was actively involved in the Ukrainian revolution, including supporting neo-Nazis, to overthrown a pro-Russian administration in Ukraine. He was present in the revolution. After his will was done, McCain has been fighting for the U.S. Congress and its military to arm Ukraine against pro-Russian separatists.
John McCain with neo-Nazi leader in Ukraine
In a sign of McCain’s successful pressure, the Trump administration has appointed Kurt Volker, a neocon who was the director of the McCain Institute, to head the Trump policy on Ukraine, guaranteeing the fulfillment of the neocon ambitions against Russia. Volker wants U.S. arms transfers to Kiev.
Recently, socialist Democrats and “conservative” Republicans, spurred by McCain, joined forces to impose more sanctions on Russia, which is a more conservative and Christian nation today. The sanctions were imposed over Ukraine. McCain wants a solid U.S. military grip on Ukraine, which is in the Russia border. There is a carnage happening in Ukraine, supported by U.S. policies guided by McCain’s neocon geopolitical ambitions.
After his successful revolution in Ukraine, McCain “visited” (uninvited, which means he invaded) Syria to show support to Islamic rebels, who with ISIS and al-Qaida seek to overthrow the Syrian government. By McCain’s pressure, the U.S. Congress has approved sanctions on Syria. These sanctions are unjustifiable, because even the Islamic Saudis, who were responsible for the 9/11, have never suffered any U.S. sanctions from McCain and the U.S. Congress.
John McCain with Islamic terrorists in Syria
The Christian population in Syria, present since the apostolic days and comprising over 10 percent of the Syrian population, has been decimated by ISIS, which was created, according to Trump, by Obama and Hillary Clinton. And it has also been decimated by U.S.-backed rebels.
The Christian population in Iraq was also decimated in 500,000 Christians in the aftermath of the U.S. invasion.
It is very significant that the U.S. military, which should guard its own borders and security, is very busy meddling in other nations’ affairs, while U.S. borders are unprotected.
Many Trump’s speeches in 2016 were dedicated against neocons and their military expansionism at the expense of Christian lives and at the expense of the Protestant foundations of the U.S. He condemned Bush’s invasion of Iraq and U.S. military interventionism in Syria. Not surprisingly, for his 2016 anti-neocon stances, Trump was condemned by McCain.
Trump’s speeches were a kind of spiritual warning, because he was the first U.S. candidate to attack neocons and their military imperialism. God used Trump to show how demonic the neocons’ ideas are. Has now God used, or allowed, a collision of a powerful U.S. military ship to warn America that he is going to destroy the “walls” around America?
With God tearing down “walls,” even inoffensive unarmed ships can damage a powerful destroyer.
Is it coincidence that a powerful U.S. destroyer named “John McCain” collided with an unarmed civil ship in the same day an eclipse took over the continental U.S. and 33 days after Senator McCain’s brain cancer was diagnosed?
If solar eclipses may be warnings that judgment is coming upon a nation, does it mean that judgment is coming upon the United States over McCain’s bloody neocon military imperialism?
In his 2016 speeches, Trump said that the U.S. should protect its own borders and stop its neocon interventions in other nations. But now his administration is following McCain.
Has God used the collision of the USS “John S. McCain” as a warning for Trump and America to stop following McCain and his aggressive neocon military imperialism?
America has drifted far away from her original mission. America was founded by George Washington and other Protestants to develop as a Christian nation taking care of its own affairs, not to police the world, not to meddle in far-away nations’ affairs and not to invade nations for the sake of neocon policies and to the detriment of thousands of innocent Christians lives, especially in Iraq, Syria and Libya, whose Christian populations were the main victims of the U.S. military interventions.
U.S. neocon policies have taken a heavy toll of Christian lives internationally and, sooner or later, may exact a heavy price in America’s “walls.”
With information from Michael Snyder, Charisma magazine and WND.
Recommended Reading:

Tuesday, August 22, 2017

Google’s Racial War Against Whites?


Google’s Racial War Against Whites?

By Julio Severo
If the skin color is not important, why is Google giving preeminence to Afrocentrism and black supremacism, which value its own “cultural” color as superior to all other “cultural” colors?
Bishop James E. Dukes of Chicago’s Liberation Christian Center wants the removal of George Washington’s statue from the Washington Park in Chicago because he considers the first U.S. president “racist”
If you defend “Europeancentrism,” it is branded automatically “racist.” But if you defend Afrocentrism (which is synonymous with “blackcentrism,” meaning everything that has the Afro or black “cultural” color is to be in the center of everything) it just fine for the Left and for Google. For them, European in the center is “racism,” just because European is synonymous with white. But Afro in the center is not racism, just because African is synonymous with black.
According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, racism is “a belief that some races are by nature superior to others; also: discrimination based on such belief.”
Google has been doing it. Not against blacks. Against whites.
Google puts Afrocentrism as superior to others.
Google does discrimination based on such belief.
Google just is not severely chastised, condemned, ostracized and morally and legally lynched by the powerful mainstream media because in the prevalent left-wing media mindset anything done against blacks is a crime and anything done against whites is “long overdue.” The Left believes that whites deserve persecution.
Google and the Left despise America’s spiritual essence.
America has produced so many inventions that America and inventions are almost synonymous.
Since America is mostly white due to her European roots, most American inventors are white.
A study reported by DailyMail gave the reason for the abundant inventiveness in America: Protestantism. DailyMail said that American white Protestants are incredibly creative. More creative than Catholics and Jews.
Is it just incidental that the largest Protestant nation in the world — the United States — is also the most creative nation in the world?
The abundant historical creativeness and inventiveness in the United States is a direct result of its overwhelmingly Protestant white culture.
But Google wants you to see it differently. When you google “white inventors,” many hits in the first page are negatively exotic. Many in the hits are not whites, and many reports on whites in the hits are not positive. (See Google’s results recorded here: http://archive.is/guslk)
The pictures, which should show only white people, mostly depict black people. The most prominent articles portray whites in an inferior and demeaning light.
It seems that whites, in the Google universe, should be taken out of sight. Perhaps they should not exist. Racism is rampant at Google — against whites.
In contrast, when you google “black inventors,” hits are outstandingly positive. Hits, in the first page, show fine reports on blacks. (See Google’s results recorded here: http://archive.is/wq6z5)
The pictures, which should show only black people, actually depict only black people!
Even when you use Google in Portuguese in Brazil, hits for black inventors (see: http://archive.is/WOmVM) are vastly better than hits for white inventors (see: http://archive.is/xa2wq).
Google’s behavior is perfectly consistent with AFROCENTRISM. “Afro,” relating to Africa or blacks. “Centrism,” relating to center. According to the Oxford Dictionary of English, the adjective “Afrocentric” means “regarding African or black culture as pre-eminent.”
To portray European or white culture as pre-eminent, even when it is historically pre-eminent in America and in Europe, is “racism.” But to portray African or black culture as pre-eminent, even when it is historically not pre-eminent in an overwhelmingly European or white culture, is not racism. Protected racism? Protected dishonesty?
Why is Google imposing the Afrocentric trend, which has a destructive trail?
Last week, the Washington Times reported that Bishop James E. Dukes of Chicago’s Liberation Christian Center made headlines for calling on the Chicago mayor to rename Washington Park and remove a statue of the first U.S. president over his ties to slavery. Bishop Dukes, who is a Pentecostal black, told his Facebook flock that “it’s time.”
And yesterday the Washington Times reported that “A monument to Christopher Columbus that was over 200 years old [in Baltimore] was smashed with a sledgehammer Monday morning to combat a ‘culture of white supremacy.’”
Columbus was an Italian explorer and navigator (of Jewish extraction) who discovered America in 1492. His “crime” in an America obsessed with Afrocentrism? He was white.
If even a black Pentecostal bishop wants a statue of white George Washington removed, what expect from Google?
So it is no wonder that whites have been morally and culturally blacklisted by Google not only in English but internationally, including in Brazil. A Google search for white inventors presents dishonest results in the U.S. and internationally.
Why is Google giving preference to Afrocentrism?
Why is Google demoting the rich American white Protestant culture?
Why is Google behaving in a discriminatory way?
Whether Google recognizes it or not, America was founded by white people, who were 98 percent Protestant.
American blacks, who are so proud of their accomplishments, were able to flourish only in a white Protestant culture. If they had never been taken to America as slaves and still lived in Africa, could they have flourished in the same way they flourished in America?
In the 13th century, when white Europe had castles and cities with impressive cathedrals and buildings, black Africa had… almost nothing. A vast continent, larger than Europe, without castles and impressive buildings.
Even though Afrocentrists and black supremacists point to ancient Egypt and its massive pyramids as an example that Africa was superior to the old European castles and buildings, modern studies shatter the Afrocentrists’ Egyptian hope. According to a WND report, “In the first full genome sequencing of ancient Egyptians, spanning a 1,300-year-period dating back to 1400 B.C., scientists have concluded the people of the pharaonic period were more closely related to modern Europeans.”
White Protestant Americans have a colossal legacy of constructions and inventions. To exterminate it from history (and Google) is racism leading, obviously, to cultural genocide.
If Afrocentrists and black supremacists (including Google, which has put black inventors in the center of inventions and above white inventors) want to be honest with themselves, they should move to Africa and live only with what Africans created there.
If they want to be honest with reality, they should recognize that the white Protestant culture in America was and is the best environment for them to flourish.
Yes, there are problems in the U.S. white culture, including racism. Every culture is imperfect. But white Protestant churches have recognized, condemned and fought against racism centuries before Google. And racism is not an exclusive American issue. Even in Africa, there is racism of black tribes against black tribes.
Slavery abolition did not come from Africa or blacks or Google or Afrocentrists or black supremacists. It came from Protestant whites. Even today, there is slavery in Africa — blacks enslaving blacks —, while in the white America they are free.
Prominent whites in the anti-slavery movement, which was white, were Protestants William Wilberforce, Charles Finney, Abraham Lincoln, etc.
Wilberforce created the first law, with international impact, banning slavery over 200 years ago.
The worst kind of white racism in the world history was Nazism, which was not defeated by Africa, or blacks, or Google or Afrocentrists or black supremacists. It was defeated by the United States and the Soviet Union, largely white nations, which were in military alliance against the esoteric, white racism of Nazi Germany.
The main world leaders against Nazism — Protestant Franklin Delano Roosevelt and atheist Josef Stalin — were totally white. There was a difference between them — capitalism and Marxism —, and this difference, hated and loved by blacks, was born in Europe. The Democratic and Republican systems were also created in Europe.
Even in South Africa, racism was defeated only after a powerful pressure from the white America, white Europe and white Soviet Union.
So whites are in an excellent position to speak against racism, because they have fought racism among themselves as no other race has ever fought.
White Protestant Americans and English Protestant Europeans banned slavery in their white nations and also in many black nations in Africa — with no Google help and with no Afrocentric help.
White Protestant Americans and English Protestant Europeans freed white and black slaves — with no Google help and with no Afrocentric help.
Whites are preeminent, as no other race, in the fight against racism and slavery. Even when black leaders are involved in the fight against racism, their fight was inspired and helped by whites. Protestant minister Martin Luther King Jr., who was inspired by the American white socialist Baptist theologian Walter Rauschenbusch, would never have had success without white support. Nelson Mandela, who was inspired by white Karl Marx, would never have had success without white support from Europe, America and the Soviet Union.
If, as Afrocentrists accuse, whites have an eternal debt to blacks over black slavery, and Google is demoting white inventors as a reparative measure, why do not they demand reparations from Muslims nations that were chief slavers for centuries, including selling black slaves to Europeans and Americans? Why does not Google also demote Muslims? Muslims also sold untold thousands of white slaves to Africa.
Why do not Afrocentrists demand reparations from African nations that sold black slaves to Europeans and Americans? Why does not Google also demote such nations in its search engine?
Black slavery would have been impossible without conquering black tribes selling blacks from vanquished tribes to Europeans and Americans. Africa has huge reparations to do to black Americans.
And in the past centuries when conquering black tribes had no Americans and Europeans to sell their black slaves from vanquished tribes, they sold them among themselves. Black selling black. Black buying black. Slavery was too normal in Africa.
Considering that slavery is old and traditional in Africa, could blacks have freed themselves alone without Protestant Americans and English Protestant Europeans? If they had such power, Africa would have no slavery even today.
Could blacks have flourished without the predominant white Protestant culture in the U.S.?
Ku Klux Klan (KKK) is repugnant and should be banned and condemned. Most Protestant whites condemn it. But do Google and most blacks condemn Afrocentrism and black supremacism?
So Afrocentrists and Google have no excuse to use KKK to hide, demote and undervalue factual truths about whites and their obvious positive hegemony in the U.S. inventions. Google has no right to use its search engine as a propaganda machine to promote an Afrocentric ideology against whites in the U.S., Brazil and around the world.
Google’s dishonesty against white inventors is as repugnant as KKK’s dishonesty against blacks.
If Google did to black inventors what it is doing to white inventors, it would be considered sheer racist propaganda. It would be criminal behavior.
Google would go bankrupt if it treated black inventors as it has been treating white inventors.
Google’s war is not only against white inventors. It is also against reality and honesty.
Racism is rampant in a Google search for white inventors, privileging an Afrocentric ideology and demeaning a powerful American creative culture formed by white Protestants.
Portuguese version of this article: A guerra racial do Google contra os brancos?
Recommended Reading: