ThePopularAutist

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

Well, if it has to be one or the other the only logical conclusion would be the heartland model since it is the only one of the two models (not that there are not other models) that have prophetically confirmed locations from the BOM such as the Hill Cumorah, Zelph Mound, and several others.

[Konstantin Kisin @KonstantinKisin]

"It's very important not to politicise a personal tragedy."

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

Corporations can’t compete with sovereign powers. People are spread too thin between state institutions that no longer serve their interests and churches that centralize capital in toto from both sides out of the hands of familial institutions that are all but gone because that capital has been completely consumed to the point of intergenerational indebtedness. The state and churches have become more prosperous while families have become meaningfully poorer to the extent that the youth have largely given up on family formation.

Having formally established houses with offices, duties, obligations, intergenerational transfer of knowledge, skills, etc used to be the norm, now people struggle to form basic nuclear families. People are exhausted and no one is helping them in any real way.

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

It isn't genetic, it does seem however that it "might" be a defect resulting from the body of the mother failing to naturally abort the baby for whatever reason. So, it "might" be the case that they are born that way and we (the west broadly speaking) compound that defect with defective ideology that weaponizes the defect.

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

It’s provable, people have been outed as agents provocateur before. If I say you beat your wife and you say you don’t, does that mean you do? Of course not, we have standards of evidence and due process for a reason and people have become way too cavalier in making accusations without any burden of proof where they pay no cost for making such accusations.

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

@GuyInco15542744 Polygamy is almost entirely disastrous. There is only really one set of circumstances where it MIGHT not be but we don’t have any modern examples of it so 🤷🏼‍♂️

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

I’m not a fan of Dugin by any stretch but does he say “modern western civilization” or the “liberal unipolar order”? The last time I really listened or read anything of his was about three years ago and I seem to remember him more explicitly referring to the liberal order and not western civilization specifically which is a separate and distinct thing.

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

People throw around the fed accusations all the time to undermine anyone that is actively trying to find solutions to sociopolitical problems. It just a form of containment. Tuckers father was CIA if I remember correctly and he admits he applied or was going to but didn’t or didn’t make the cut allegedly. He may or may not be but it’s always better to go with what is provable when making any public claims. My rule is, “what is testifiable?” Speaking to the public, in public, about matters public requires the full scope of responsible due diligence. We should be enforcing libel, slander, and defamation laws much more strictly.

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

This is James' version of fed-coating people. He hasn't been a serious analyst for a while now. There is no such thing as "the woke right" there is no leader of an imagined woke right. He just creates bucket categories to container people in so he doesn't have to actually deal with substantive arguments.

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

https://t.co/v8yBfZ1Ehy

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

I see people dismissing your concerns, but I think that often serves as an evasion of responsibility rather than an examination of the problem. So I'll offer my perspective on why churches are struggling to retain members and build durable communities.

At the most basic level, most members today participate in the church as consumers rather than as citizens of a shared order. Their investment is often reduced to a limited set of obligations: attend Sunday meetings, pay tithing, watch conference, participate in occasional social events, and fulfill a calling so long as it does not interfere with higher personal priorities.

That is not necessarily a moral failure. It is the predictable behavior of people operating within a modern consumer society. People approach institutions the same way they approach any other service provider: they evaluate costs, benefits, convenience, and outcomes. If the institution appears unable to deliver what was promised, they become dissatisfied and eventually leave.

In that sense, churches today are often treated less like communities with a shared destiny and more like membership organizations competing in a marketplace of beliefs, experiences, and services.

The deeper problem is that churches are no longer sovereign orders, nor even subsidiary sovereign orders. Historically, religious communities often governed significant portions of their members' lives. They exercised authority over education, charity, welfare, dispute resolution, marriage, inheritance, economic cooperation, and community standards. Membership involved not merely belief but participation in a comprehensive social order.

Today, almost all of those functions belong to the state and the market.

As a result, churches are expected to produce the benefits of a complete social order without possessing the powers necessary to create one. They are expected to strengthen families, build communities, reduce loneliness, increase prosperity, develop character, transmit culture, and prepare people for eternal life, while lacking authority over most of the institutions that shape daily behavior.

This creates a fundamental contradiction.

Families are being asked to live under two different systems of governance at the same time.

The first system is the modern state-market order. It governs employment, education, healthcare, housing, retirement, inheritance law, taxation, welfare, licensing, financial markets, and most property relations. It determines where people live, how they earn a living, how they educate their children, and how they accumulate wealth.

The second system is the church. It asks for time, labor, loyalty, service, moral discipline, tithing, missionary work, and family commitment.

The problem is that these two systems are often competing for the same scarce resources: time, attention, labor, money, and emotional energy.

Families therefore bear the costs of participation in both systems while receiving the governing benefits of only one.

The state determines inheritance. The market determines employment. Banks determine credit. Schools determine education. Courts determine dispute resolution. Corporations determine economic opportunity.

Meanwhile, the church asks members to sacrifice for a kingdom that it does not possess the institutional authority to fully build.

This tension helps explain why discussions of Zion, stewardship, inheritance, and kingdom-building are often muted or deferred into the future.

The church can teach salvation because salvation is primarily an individual covenant relationship with God.

It can teach exaltation because exaltation concerns eternal promises.

But teaching Zion raises much harder questions because Zion is not merely a theological condition. Zion is a social order.

A genuine Zion would require coordinated stewardship, intergenerational inheritance, economic cooperation, dispute resolution, welfare systems, education systems, cultural transmission, and institutions capable of sustaining a people across generations.

Most members have little conception of what that would actually require because nearly every one of those functions has been transferred elsewhere.

As a result, the focus naturally shifts toward future rewards rather than present construction. We speak of a kingdom that will be built, a Zion that will come, and blessings that will be realized at some future time. Each generation hopes it may happen within their lifetime, yet generation after generation passes and the practical structure required for such an order remains largely absent.

This is not a criticism of temples. Temples are indispensable. But temples alone do not constitute a complete social order.

A people can possess temples while lacking the institutions necessary to organize land, labor, capital, inheritance, production, and stewardship across generations.

Property is central to this discussion because property is not merely ownership. Property is responsibility extended through time.

Property includes land, homes, businesses, tools, animals, savings, investments, productive assets, skills, relationships, institutions, and inherited knowledge. It is everything entrusted to a people for preservation, development, and transmission.

Historically, families grew through stewardship of property. They inherited responsibility, not merely wealth. They learned to govern households, farms, businesses, trades, and communities. Through that stewardship they acquired competence, judgment, foresight, and self-government.

Modern society has dramatically reduced the amount of meaningful stewardship available to ordinary families.

Most people manage consumption rather than production. They rent rather than own. They administer accounts rather than enterprises. They inherit little responsibility beyond personal financial maintenance.

As a result, many of the character-forming experiences that historically developed leadership, competence, and intergenerational thinking are increasingly rare.

This matters because stewardship transforms people in ways that volunteer service alone cannot.

Accepting a calling teaches responsibility.

But being entrusted with the care of hundreds of acres, a business, a herd, a workshop, a housing development, a school, or an industrial enterprise teaches responsibility at an entirely different scale.

The burden of preserving, improving, and transmitting productive assets across generations develops forms of judgment, discipline, and long-term thinking that are difficult to replicate elsewhere.

The challenge facing churches is therefore not simply declining attendance or weakening faith.

It is that they are attempting to produce the outcomes of a sovereign social order while operating within a larger system that controls most of the resources, institutions, and property necessary to create those outcomes.

Until that tension is understood, discussions about retention, commitment, family formation, and kingdom-building will often focus on symptoms rather than causes.

The question is not merely whether members believe.

The question is whether a people can build the social, economic, and institutional foundations necessary to sustain families across generations while simultaneously operating under a competing system that claims authority over most of the same territory.

That is a far more difficult problem than simply encouraging greater participation.

[Cwic @CwicShow]

If you've seen the video, you've seen a perfect example of how wokism destroys society. But "woke" is dead, right? The UK is currently bankrupt in its values.

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

The issue isn’t “all law is enforced at gunpoint,” because that collapses very different kinds of social order into one bucket.

A healthy society has layers of constraint. Some things are handled by manners, norms, reputation, custom, religion, family discipline, contract, and local association. Other things belong to formal law because they involve clear, public, adjudicable violations serious enough to justify coercive enforcement.

Modern systems often blur those categories. They legalize things that should stay in the realm of norm, custom, or voluntary association, while also failing to recognize some real harms because they use too narrow a concept of property.

That is also where a lot of libertarian analysis comes up short. If you treat property only as physical objects and obvious trespass, then you miss a lot of real violations: costs imposed on others through fraud, sabotage, pollution, predation on commons, institutionalized asymmetry, and other transfers of burden that are still invasions of people’s lives, time, agency, and material interests.

So the real question is not just “would you kill to enforce it?”
The prior questions are:

Is this a genuine violation rather than a mere difference in preference?
Is it publicly knowable and adjudicable?
Does it belong to law, or to norms and custom?
And are we doing a full accounting of the property, costs, and harms involved?

If you do not distinguish those layers, you get the worst of both worlds: overcriminalization where law should not reach, and under-enforcement where genuine violations are ignored.

[Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 @pmarca]

Wait, what happened to the vigilante group? Can we bring them back?

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

This is a terrible thing for any family to have to endure. Please help if you can. 🙏🏻

[Cwic @CwicShow]

The Gale family is facing unimaginable pain after a tragic accident that took their son Parker and left others seriously injured. They need our help to cover medical bills and funeral costs. Please consider donating or sharing to support them during this difficult time. https://t.co/0tksc0UYwa

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

These come from court transcripts

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

@ConceptualJames Yes, but not by bringing them here and not by abandoning the principles that made us great before entering a period of decline post WWII and an accelerated decline post 1960’s and 1980’s and the increasing rapidity post 2000’s.

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

@SocialistMormon People don’t even know there is a difference between decoration, design, art, and high-art. You are expecting way to much of people 😜

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

Holy smokes! 😲

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

Free the political prisoners in Britain!

[ThePopularAutist @PopularAutist]

@BasedMikeLee I hear you but the Chinese economy isn't marxist, it is a mixed economy. Governmentally, it is arguably more of a Han supremacist fascist order.