Point of View May 12, 2026 – Hour 1 : Tuesday’s Top Stories

[00:00:04] Across America, live, this is Point of View, Kerby Anderson. Thank you for joining me today. It is a Tuesday edition of Point of View, just a great opportunity to look at a number of issues in the news.

[00:00:27] I'm going to start off by talking about affordability because that is certainly one of the themes that is going to run through the midterm elections. I also want to get into some others. We've had Gatsat on the program. He talks about misguided empathy, which is interesting because he's looking at that from one point of view. And Allie Beth Stuckey wrote a bestselling book called Toxic Empathy. So we'll get into that a little bit later. Then I do want to come back to the whole issue of gerrymandering. I've posted a piece by Kevin McCullough.

[00:00:57] There have been some very interesting comments by, again, George Washington University professor, law professor Jonathan Turley about what is going on there and a couple of other topics that we will try to cover in the first hour. Second hour, we're going to spend some time talking with former Judge Michael Warren about his book, The Revolutionary Words That Forged America, The Definitive Guide to the Declaration of Independence.

[00:01:22] And when he says definitive, he's not kidding. 450 pages. And we will certainly try to do it justice as we talk about the declaration, because once again, we're in our theme of America 250. So we'll get into that in just a few minutes. First of all, let's talk about what it costs for you just to keep food on the table, to pay for food, rent and fuel.

[00:01:48] And a lot of that gets back to the fact that I'm now pulling this from the New York Times article. Inflation accelerates after weeks of war in Iran. No real surprise, but what we've seen is a sharp increase in energy costs due to the war that has been taking place. And so if you use the Consumer Price Index, which again, we've admitted before, somewhat flawed. Nevertheless, it rose 3.8 percent in April compared to a year ago.

[00:02:16] Now, the primary reason for that now is energy prices. But nevertheless, in the past, some of that was due to Mr. Trump's tariffs. I will get to that a little bit later, because that is my commentary today called tariffs and tax refunds. So we'll get to that in due course. But let's just take that as it is. And certainly the biggest increase is the issue of energy.

[00:02:44] And interestingly enough, that has reached about four and a half dollars a gallon as a national average. Some may be higher where you are. Some may be lower. Which is why the president talked about the idea of suspending the 18.4 cent gallon federal excise tax on that. I think that has nowhere to go but down, if for no other reason than the fact that it would be seen as a gimmick.

[00:03:13] And I think it's important to recognize, and even the New York Times reminds us, interestingly enough, that, and I guess it was even the Wall Street Journal remind us, that when John McCain was running in 2008, he was talking about having some kind of gas tax holiday. And that was seen as a gimmick. Of course, I think most people knew that the attempt by President Biden to actually take gasoline out of the Strategic Reserve was another gimmick.

[00:03:42] And I see these gimmicks being presented all the time. But I thought for just a few minutes, I would give you at least one article that appears in the National Review. Five Ways Republicans Can Bring Down Gas Prices and Reclaim the Affordability Mantle. Now, the first one he mentions is the idea of a gas holiday. But in some cases, he's looking at what is actually happening in the states.

[00:04:10] He reminds us, for our listeners in Mississippi, you have the nation's lowest gas taxes, which is 21 cents a gallon. For our listeners in California, I don't think that surprises you, you have the highest at 71 cents per gallon. Now, again, those taxes are used to help rebuild roads and a variety of other things. But if you did have a gas tax holiday, whether a federal one or a state one, it would bring the cost down.

[00:04:39] But, again, it's a reminder that when you pay for gasoline, oftentimes you're just paying for the taxes on the gasoline. Although I think it is also true, as I'm looking this up, you can read it for yourself, that even the production of gasoline in Mississippi is a bit cheaper as well. So that's the first one. The second one was to actually have the EPA.

[00:05:03] And that is, I think, a real possibility, because the EPA administrator right now is Lee Zeldin, to actually grant more small refinery exemptions, especially when it has to do with some of these waivers on ethanol. This goes back to, again, the attempt to have at least half of America's corn, which is used to produce not corn that you eat, but ethanol, which you put in your gas tank.

[00:05:31] And so, in some respects, that is, I think, another creative and suggestive idea. Number three was additional ideas about looking at some of the Biden-era provisions that would actually find ways that you could begin to save billions of dollars by loosening some of the monitoring requirements right now in the EPA.

[00:05:57] And I do believe there's going to be some pressure on Lee Zeldin, who's the EPA administrator, to actually see if he can implement some of those. Number four has to do with all the way back to President Barack Obama, in which we had Tier 3 gasoline-sulfur standards, which, again, shows some ways in which we could reduce the cost of gas that you pay for.

[00:06:18] And finally, number five, to actually look at some of the barriers to energy production that could be removed. This would be some things in which, right now, permitting sometimes should take, as some people estimate, maybe 28 days. In many cases, it takes up to four years.

[00:06:40] So, these are some, I think, creative suggestions which illustrate, again, that when it comes time for people voting right now in these primaries or in the November election, a lot of people are going to be thinking about whether or not they want to elect this person to Congress or to the governorship based on issues of affordability.

[00:07:02] And affordability has not exactly been an issue that the Trump administration or even many of the Republicans have wanted to run on, but this was at least a concrete and creative way to begin to address that. So, I thought I'd bring that up because I do believe this issue of affordability is going to be with us for some time. There's some very good reasons for that. If you haven't noticed, we're still not getting quite a lot of oil through the Strait of Hormuz,

[00:07:29] and that is affecting not only commodities like oil, but commodities like fertilizer and a variety of others, which can affect everything from energy prices to food prices. And so, there are some people that have at least put together some ideas about what can be done. We'll see over the next couple of weeks whether that is the case, but I do believe that, as we said really almost this time last year,

[00:07:55] that this really significant issue in these 2026 elections is going to be the issue of affordability. And with the war in Iran, with the Strait of Hormuz somewhat limited in terms of what can get out, and in terms of even the previous tariffs, that has not bode well for some of the individuals that would be running under the auspices of Donald Trump

[00:08:23] and keeping Republicans in control of both the House and the Senate. So, first article, just back to kitchen table issues. How much does it take to keep the lights on, to put gas in your car, and to pay your family and pay your rent? All of that is really important. We'll take a break and come back with more right after this.

[00:09:00] This is Viewpoints with Kirby Anderson. You've probably heard the phrase, The government giveth and the government taketh away. That's an apt description of taxes and tariffs in 2026. Many Americans have been pleasantly surprised by the tax refunds they received this year because of the tax cuts inserted into the one big, beautiful bill. No taxes on tips, overtime, and Social Security provided many Americans with a significant check from the IRS.

[00:09:27] Unfortunately, while the government was putting money back in the pockets of U.S. taxpayers with tax refunds, it was also taking money out through tariffs that increase prices that Americans pay. Former Senator Phil Graham is one of the co-authors of the Trump tax increase of 2026. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the taxes implemented during the Trump administration will generate $331 billion this year, but the new tax cuts will only save taxpayers $230 billion.

[00:09:55] One of the themes of this election is affordability. By October, the office estimates that these new tariffs will cost American consumers and businesses $443 billion, while the tax cuts will have provided them $379 billion. One question that is always asked about tariffs is, who pays? The CBO estimates that businesses are absorbing about 30% of the cost of tariffs. Consumers are paying their remaining 70%.

[00:10:22] Another question is, how will this affect the midterm elections? Defenders of the tariff policies argue that these tax cuts provide new benefits, perhaps, but voters have short memories. Affordability is a major issue, especially with the Iran war's impact on supply chains. The president's tariffs have made prices higher. I'm Kirby Anderson, and that's my point of view.

[00:10:49] Go deeper on topics like you just heard by visiting pointofview.net. That's pointofview.net. You're listening to Point of View, your listener-supported source for truth. Back once again, let's, if we can, for just another minute or two talk about the impact that tariffs are having. My commentary today is entitled Tariffs and Tax Refunds.

[00:11:14] And I start out by saying, you know, you probably heard the phrase, the government giveth and the government taketh away. And that really has been kind of an apt description of what has happened here in 2026. Because most Americans have been pleasantly surprised by the tax refunds that they've received, and hopefully you've received yours by now, that has come in large part from some of the tax cuts that were inserted into the one big beautiful bill. But, and first of all, let me stay on that.

[00:11:42] No taxes on tips, no taxes on overtime, no taxes on Social Security, as well as a couple of other things in terms of depreciation really are significant. So many people may have received a check from the IRS. So that's the government giveth. The government taketh away comes from the fact that while the government was putting money in your pockets, in some respects it was also taking money out through the tariffs that increased.

[00:12:08] Now a lot of people will say, well, is this just coming from people that don't like Donald Trump? Well, one of the authors that I quote is from former Senator Phil Graham, who's a Republican. He may or may not like Trump, but he's honest with the facts, so is his co-author. And if you simply look at the numbers from the Congressional Budget Office, which is supposed to be nonpartisan, sometimes it skews a little one way or another,

[00:12:32] nevertheless, they figure that in some respects the tariffs during this time in 2026 have generated about $331 billion as a few weeks ago when this study was done. And the tax cuts save about $230 billion. So we're off by about $100 billion. If this plays out by October, the numbers are even more stark in terms of more,

[00:13:02] more money coming out from tariffs than money coming in from tax refunds. Now the question you might have is, well, who pays for that? Because the argument always being made by the president and many of his supporters is, well, the companies pay that or the foreign producers pay that. Well, again, the Congressional Budget Office recognizes that maybe businesses have absorbed about 30% of the cost of tariffs.

[00:13:29] But the remaining, what, 70% has been something that we pay in higher prices. Now, some of those tariffs have languished because of the Supreme Court decision on that, and then they tried to implement some others, and there have now been some questions as to whether or not that is allowed as well. But I think it just gets back to this issue of affordability. If, indeed, people vote their pocketbooks, and they do so often, by the way, then that is, I think, an issue.

[00:13:59] And so if you are concerned about this issue of affordability, we're only talking now in May, and some, of course, have voted in the primaries, and it's a long way from May to October and November, because people start voting in October, which is why I'm talking about October. So it's possible that some of the affordability issues will fade away, or some of the things we mentioned just a minute ago will be implemented. But it is something to pay attention to,

[00:14:27] and, of course, we will pay attention to it here on Point of View. So if you want to read the first article by Andrew Follett or my commentary, they're both available at the website, pointofview.net. New book out by Gad Saad. He's been on the program with us before numerous times, and the book is entitled Suicidal Empathy, Dying to be Kind. Now, he uses the phrase suicidal empathy. If you're familiar at all with Allie Beth Stuckey,

[00:14:57] who used to be one of the roundtable guests here on Point of View, now works at The Blaze, she has a book that came out with the title Toxic Empathy. I heard her recently in an interview say, that really wasn't the title for my book, but the publisher picked that title, and, of course, it illustrates again that sometimes you can have empathy, but you can maybe go too far. And Gad Saad looks a lot at this from an evolutionary point of view.

[00:15:25] So just a disclaimer that if you read through his article, which is well written, he's going to, in some respects, give you an evolutionary perspective. We're going to look at it from a Christian perspective. We don't believe that we're an evolutionary product. We're created in God's image, but we do have emotions. God has given us those emotions, and that is the case. But he points out that if you look at some of these historical novels, and even some of these historical treatises,

[00:15:51] they all point to the fact that sometimes civilizations die from suicide, suicide, not murder. He quotes from Arnold Toynbee, the British historian, quotes from James Burnham, suicide of the West, in which, in some respects, we do it to ourselves. And he says, empathy is one of those human emotions that can misfire. It can malfunction. And he uses a different example to get the point across. Anger.

[00:16:20] Well, anger can be a very useful emotion. Somebody attacks you, your anger, your fight or flight syndrome, will help protect you and your family. And so we recognize that sometimes fear and anger are helpful. But if a person is, as he said, insanely angry all the time, then he needs to enroll in anger management classes. Likewise, we have other emotions as well.

[00:16:48] Sometimes positive emotions or negative emotions can go awry. Sometimes when they are used so that we do not necessarily employ our reasonable faculty, and so we are driven by our emotions rather than by first principles and by critical thinking and logic, which we try to talk about so much here on the program, you can see the problem. And so he points out that emotional dysregulation,

[00:17:18] emotional dysregulation, in other words, poor regulation, is the feature of many psychiatric disorders. Too much anxiety, too much sadness can lead to depression. For example, hyperactivity can lead to ADHD and OCD. He gives you lots of examples of that in which he simply points out that, if anything, we should recognize that we should have empathy for people around us.

[00:17:48] But oftentimes, in order to enact especially some of the more liberal progressive ideas, what oftentimes is used is to play upon your emotions and to say, well, because these people are homeless, then we need to provide them a constant source of income. That if we are concerned about anybody that has faced some kind of financial difficulty,

[00:18:16] that we need to step in and fix it for them. And those ideas, as important as they might be for us to want to minister, go contrary to even biblical ideas, which, of course, is not in his piece, because he's looking at it primarily from an evolutionary point of view. But think about the fact that these scriptures themselves talk about the fact that the ruin of the poor is their poverty. You see this in the Proverbs.

[00:18:43] In other words, sometimes the reason people are poor is because they have bad ideas. Matter of fact, this idea of gluttony and laziness and neglect are certainly themes that run through the Proverbs as to why some people might be poor. You even have in the New Testament, those who will not work will not eat. It doesn't say those who cannot work, but it is, I think, a reminder that sometimes we should

[00:19:12] not only reach out with compassion towards individuals who have put themselves or have been put in difficult situations, but we also should exercise what you might call tough love. In some cases say you would be better if you were to clean up your act, if you were to focus on the right principles, if you would stop using drugs,

[00:19:34] stop being an alcoholic, stop being lazy, stop eating as much, using as much, spending more on your credit card, whatever the phrase might be. And so the idea that he's pointing out here is that not only do we see this with individuals, which Allie Beth Stuckey called toxic empathy, but we also see this at a nationwide level, suicidal empathy.

[00:20:02] And so he takes it one step further, and that is one famous quote from Arnold Toynbee was this, civilizations die from suicide, not by murder. Or even the one I mentioned a minute ago, James Burnham, it may be added that suicide is probably more frequent than murder as the end phase of civilization. Interesting enough, the title of his book from 1964, I remember it, The Suicide of the West.

[00:20:29] So whether you look at it individually, as Allie Beth Suckey looks at it and talks about how sometimes a misguided or even toxic empathy justifies things that really from a rational point of view make no sense, or whether you look at the fact that we as a culture have developed what he calls suicidal empathy, it is something to pay attention to.

[00:20:52] So you might want to read the book, but this particular article I've posted is actually an excerpt from the book, which was provided by the particular imprint of Harper Collins called Broadside. So if you'd like to read it, it's a reminder that we need to make sure that we certainly have emotions, but we don't let that prevent us from making wise and rational decisions about policies and procedures

[00:21:21] so that we can have human flourishing in the future. Let's take a break. We'll come back with more right after this. It almost seems like we live in a different world from many people in positions of authority. They say men can be women and women men. People are prosecuted differently or not at all depending on their politics.

[00:21:47] Criminals are more valued and rewarded than law-abiding citizens. It's so overwhelming, so demoralizing. You feel like giving up, but we can't. We shouldn't. We must not. As Winston Churchill said to Britain in the darkest days of World War II, never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never. Never yield to force. Never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.

[00:22:14] And that's what we say to you today. This is not a time to give in, but to step up and join Point of View in providing clarity in the chaos. We can't do it alone, but together, with God's help, we will overcome the darkness. Invest in biblical clarity today at pointofview.net or call 1-800-347-5151. pointofview.net

[00:22:42] and 800-347-5151. Point of View will continue after this. You are listening to Point of View. The opinions expressed on Point of View do not necessarily reflect the views of the management or staff of this station.

[00:23:12] And now, here again, is Kirby Anderson. In fact, once again, let's see if we can get into a couple of other issues, and one of those is the state of Virginia. Commonwealth of Virginia originally had a 6-5 split in terms of the congressional districts. And the argument that was made by the incoming governor is we would not gerrymander those districts. And as soon as she had power, they did. And as we talked about a couple weeks ago,

[00:23:39] it was gerrymandered so much that it ended up being 10 to 1. One Republican district and 10 Democratic districts. And as we mentioned on Friday briefly, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled that is unconstitutional. Wisely so. We had talked about what Jonathan Turley had said, and I'm going to quote from him again in just a minute. But that is only the beginning,

[00:24:06] because it leads then to a piece that I've posted here by Kevin McCullough, Why Democrats Ignore Rules. Now, again, we're going to look at his piece in which he talks about how Democrats have kind of an end-justifies-the-means mindset. Do Republicans? Yes, they do. We've talked about that before. And, matter of fact, oftentimes when they are engaged in that kind of utilitarian idea, they're usually called out for it. Democrats, nobody's afraid, almost everybody's afraid to say that.

[00:24:35] And the best way to illustrate this is to say, okay, now that the Virginia Supreme Court ruled, that you went from a 6-5 to a 10-1, which even if they had been maybe smart, maybe they could have made it, I don't know, a 7-4 or something like that, 8-3, something along those lines, but a 10-1 that was so extreme. And so, immediately, that is the Democrats first in the state of Virginia,

[00:25:04] and even in Washington, D.C., including House Democrat leader, Hakeem Jeffries, who really wants to be the next Speaker of the House, came up with another scheme, and that is, let's just get rid of all those justices. How would they do that? Well, they came up with this idea that you would then have a mandatory retirement age, which right now is at 73, and bring it down to 54,

[00:25:32] which just so happens to be the age of the youngest justice, who is in the majority, to strike down the Democrats' gerrymandered map. And so, as Gary Bauer points out, you want to talk about an all-out attack on the rule of law. Instead of trying to pass their new map legally, they want to just simply get rid of the state Supreme Court by coming up with this pretext. And that has led to all sorts of comments, and let me first of all go to Kevin McCullough,

[00:26:01] and then to Jonathan Turley. Kevin McCullough, of course, he would be a supporter of the Republican views, and Donald Trump probably generally. He's been on the program with us, and you've heard him before. But he points out that there has been a characteristic of the American left, and that is, if they lose an election, well, the system is broken. If the court rules against them, the court is illegitimate. If constitutional checks prevent them from getting what they want immediately, well, then the checks themselves must be removed. Not debated, removed.

[00:26:31] And he says, well, that brings us to Virginia. Following Virginia Supreme Court's rejection of the Democratic-backed, gerrymandered effort, voices on the left are now floating the idea of court packing at the state level, which I think gives you a preview of what could happen if Democrats take control of the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. But I'll leave it at that. And he talks about the idea that instead of trying to make a better case, they just want to purge the court itself.

[00:27:01] And he says, just think how insane that actually is. Not that we disagree with the ruling, not we'd like to challenge a reason. No, we just think that if the institution won't obey us, we'll actually replace the institution. And he says that Jonathan Turley rightly pointed out the danger of this mentality, which brings me to a piece that came out just the other day. He was, again, just for you that don't remember, Jonathan Turley is a legal expert.

[00:27:30] He's law professor at George Washington University. I think on numerous occasions, he says he always has voted for a Democrat. It's not like he's in the pocket of Republicans. But nevertheless, he was responding to this phone call that was held by some of the top Democrats after the Virginia Supreme Court struck down this heavily gerrymandered congressional map. And he, again,

[00:27:54] took on this whole issue in which he said that this is indicative of a party right now that seems to hold no American institution or political values. Here's the actual quote from Jonathan Turley. Quote, Well, you know, I wrote about this not because I think that it's likely to succeed, but this sack and pack proposal really captures this age of rage, which, by the way, is the title of his newest book that I have on my shelf.

[00:28:24] It captures the fact that now many on the left are saying that what we will win by any means necessary. You know, again, a utilitarian calculation. The ends justify the means. Jonathan Turley goes on to say, quote, And this is a very important issue for Hakeem Jeffries. He's very unpopular with most people in the country, but he hopes to be the next speaker of the United States. But in order to do that, he's got to engineer a majority,

[00:28:54] and he's got to get Democrats there and the House to vote for him, and he's watching that evaporate across the country. And so certainly that is the case. That's where he goes on to then say a little bit later that the Supreme, that shows you what they might want to do if they have the Supreme Court. He says, quote, It's the same mindset of by any means necessary, no institution, no value is truly sacred.

[00:29:21] Pretty strong comments from Jonathan Turley, but let me come back real quickly to this piece that is by Kevin McCullough, because he points out something else that we really didn't talk about at the time, and that is, obviously, we had people vote, if you will, on this specific change in the Virginia Constitution, which would then allow them to gerrymander these districts, because up until that time,

[00:29:51] they actually had an independent organization do that. And so they did that, and I had forgotten about this, but again, kudos to Kevin McCullough for digging it out. This all happened in what's called, I think, honestly, a low turnout election. Because it was a special election, you are changing something in the Constitution, including this idea of redistricting, by the very few votes. Matter of fact,

[00:30:20] it was very close, by the way. It just barely passed. But more importantly, the argument, well, the people voted, well, that's pretending that a low turnout cycle election somehow represents, he says, an unquestionable, overwhelming moral mandate, while simultaneously dismissing the constitutional role of the Virginia Supreme Court as intellectually dishonest. So he had reminded me of something else, because the argument sometimes comes back, well,

[00:30:49] the people voted in the election, so their vote should stand. Well, we don't live in that rule. There are times when individuals, and people, and voters have voted, and the Supreme Court, or the state courts, have struck that down, and that's because we have what? Checks and balances. But even more so, when it just barely passed in a low turnout special election, all the more to say, yes, the people, the very few people that voted, yes,

[00:31:19] they did vote, but this is not exactly the same. He says, this is not democracy failing. It's the constitutional order functioning properly. He says, the reason so many activists on the left ignore rules is because they no longer believe, and here's the key point, in objective morality at all. Rules are not viewed as fixed principles rooted in enduring truths. They are viewed as what? Temporary tools.

[00:31:47] Useful when they produce desired outcomes. Disposable when they do not. The concept that he's pointed out here is there's no stable principle underneath this power. Acquire it, protect it, expand it. And if the rules interfere with those objectives, then the rules themselves become obstacles to eliminate. Checks, balances, competing branches, constitution restraints, not to frustrate democracy,

[00:32:17] but to preserve liberty because liberty without restraint eventually collapses into coercion. And coercion is precisely where radical political movements always drift when they stop believing truth exists beyond their own desires. And he says, that's what makes the Virginia situation so revealing. And so you see the whole discussion of, well, maybe it's just time to completely restructure

[00:32:46] the court itself. We'll actually require those who were supposed to retire at the age of 73. Now, if they're 54 or older, they have to retire. And so when one branch of government disappoints you, well, you just simply replace it. That's not constitutional government. And so, as he points out, the issue isn't necessarily even the maps. The issue is whether or not we as Americans still believe

[00:33:14] in the constitutional restraints even when they apply and when they are applied, even when they prevent us from sometimes getting what we want immediately. Of course, we'll get into this in much more detail in the next hour when we talk about the Declaration of Independence with Judge Michael Warren. But I think it was a great reminder that in some respects what we're seeing in Virginia is an end justifies the mean power at any cost

[00:33:43] even if we have to get rid of justices on the Virginia Supreme Court. We'll be right back. You're listening to Point of View, your listener-supported source for truth. Wait for a few more minutes. Let me again say that tomorrow we will be getting into some very important issues that I think you will appreciate. some of our guests.

[00:34:12] We'll talk about everything from the interaction between the President and the Pope to a variety of other very interesting topics that we will be addressing. And so I hope you'll join us then. And in the next hour we're going to be getting into the Declaration. I might just hold up our booklet that we have made available to you. This one came out just in April. And if you haven't received a copy, we certainly could get one to you. But we're going to be talking about the Declaration of Independence in very significant ways. I'll hold up the book,

[00:34:42] 450 pages, just everything and more that you'd ever want to know about the Declaration and really breaks it down line by line. And I think if you really wanted to get a sense of why we are so enamored with the Declaration, I think you will begin to discover that as we break down some of these important principles that were put in the Declaration in 1776. But just before we take a break, I thought it would be good to end on this hour

[00:35:12] with a very good piece by Tony Morley. He is an individual who has been watching what is happening in the West. And just a few minutes ago, of course, I talked about Gad Saad who is himself concerned about the suicide of the West, concerned about the fact that oftentimes cultures tend to commit suicide rather than are murdered. And in some respects, this fits perfectly with Tony Morley because he says, look, the values of the West

[00:35:41] built the prosperity that we enjoy today in civilization. Tomorrow, we're going to talk a little bit about, for example, I've got a quote or two from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and also some from Howard Schultz. So I'm going to give you kind of a point, counterpoint. Did billionaires make their money legally or illegally? Should people have that much money? Shouldn't we actually tax them to the hilt? And what should we do

[00:36:10] if they actually decide to leave Seattle, New York, whatever it might be? And I think there's a sense in which that comes back to this idea as well. We have so many people today that are enjoying the fruits of a free enterprise system, enjoying the fruits of the Reformation and the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution, who today want to, in a sense, take us back to the Dark Ages and want to implement

[00:36:39] socialist policies at every turn. And Tony Morley says, you know, the past decade has seen many in the West engaged in an unprecedented campaign of cultural self-flagellation and a rejection of Western and Enlightenment values. That the West is good rather than evil has become morally suspect at best and grounds for threats and violence at the worst. And so he says, polarized critics

[00:37:07] from within perceive the downfall of the West, preaching inequality, down with imperialism, tax the rich, environmental apocalypse, racial injustice, and systematic oppression, fascism, and a hundred other pessimistic railings of the self-proclaimed champions of the proletariat. That's Tony Morley. Well, he goes on to say, from without, of course, you also have

[00:37:37] hostile foreign nations and countless proponents of Antra-Western ideologies burning flags calling for death to America, the West, the rich, the free, and really denounce everything that the West represents. And so he reminds us that if we look through history, when you get to the Reformation and then the Enlightenment, you begin to see the rise of modern science, you see,

[00:38:07] of course, the rise of what was the beginning of a free market culture, the rise of so many things that happened, and he points out that it set European culture on a process of transformation from totalitarian monarchies and oppressive religious dogma to scientific rationalism, freedom, commerce, tolerance, and even just this idea of progress. And then points out something that we've talked about many times before. Between 1800

[00:38:36] and 2025, the average global life expectancy climbed from 28 years to roughly 73 years. While extreme poverty fell from roughly 80% to about 10%. And he says over that same period, global child mortality, even in the poorest countries, plummeted from a little over 40% to 3.5%. By nearly every objective measure,

[00:39:06] he says, living standards and the equality of life improved for the average citizen globally from the United States to Uzbekistan. And he says this is part of the problem. We've become too detached from the cultural norms, the institutions, the systems, and the values that created the wealth, prosperity, and high living standards of the West that have largely forgotten that they were the prime movers and the driving forces

[00:39:36] in building that abundance. He focuses, for example, on capitalism, property rights, constitutional government, individual liberty, free markets, entrepreneurship, family values, the rule of law, and a belief that the future can and should be better than the past. These are values, he says, that make up a broader cultural system that is not just one of the many good cultures and societal systems,

[00:40:05] not a culture on par with others, but thus the best system of civilization humanity has ever had. And I think, again, if you have been listening to Point of View, even back in the days when Marlon Maddox was the host, we pointed so often to the kind of negativity in the college classrooms, which now has made its way out into the media and into the culture at large, in which no longer can we celebrate America,

[00:40:34] no longer can we celebrate the West, no longer can we celebrate the positive impact that Christianity has had on civilization, and as a result, he says, we've been goaded, bullied, threatened, and canceled into turning our backs on these values. And again, those values were all sorts of things like capitalism and free market and property rights and entrepreneurship and family values and the rule of law.

[00:41:04] And if there's one thing that we are dedicated to doing here on Point of View, it is to, once again, point back to those values because so many of those values are rooted in a biblical foundation. And once the culture rejects the Bible, once the culture rejects even the idea of absolute moral ideas, once the culture rejects the idea of the Western culture that we live in, we are seemingly headed back to some of the dark ages.

[00:41:34] As one of my booklets points out, this comes from Glenn Sunshine, with, if you really want to understand Western culture, it was Rome plus Christianity that gave you Western culture. And now that the culture is getting rid of Christianity, we're turning back to Rome, and that's not a good thing. So he says, again, these values of the West don't survive the next century if we don't uphold them. And so, if we don't, then economic

[00:42:03] growth will contract, progress and living standards will falter, and the specters of autocracy, war, hunger, ignorance, illness, and poverty will rise again. So he concludes by saying, it's time for returning to respectfully saying, the West is good. Very good piece. Just thought you might want to see how significant that is, and it's a perfect lead-in to our conversation next hour.

[00:42:32] We maybe take for granted 1776, maybe take for granted the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and this republic we have. But I think as we dig into this a little bit more with Judge Michael Warren, we're going to learn a little bit more about some of the genius that was found in that document, the Declaration of Independence. Let's take a break. If you'd like to get a copy of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, of course, we're still making that available to you. Just go to the website,

[00:43:02] pointofview.net, click on that banner, we'd be glad to send it to you. Next Hour, a good example of where you need to get a copy right now. We'll be back after this. In 19th century London, two towering historical figures did battle, not with guns and bombs, but words and ideas. London was home to Karl Marx, the father of communism, and legendary Baptist preacher Charles Spurgeon.

[00:43:31] London was in many ways the center of the world, economically, militarily, and intellectually. Marx sought to destroy religion, the family, and everything the Bible supports. Spurgeon stood against him, warning of socialism's dangers. Spurgeon understood Christianity is not just religious truth, it is truth for all of life. Where do you find men with that kind of wisdom to stand against darkness today? Get the light you need on today's

[00:44:01] most pressing issues delivered to your inbox when you sign up for the viewpoints commentary at pointofview.net slash signup. Every weekday in less than two minutes, you'll learn how to be a person of light to stand against darkness in our time. It's free, so visit pointofview.net slash signup right now. pointofview.net slash signup.

[00:44:30] Point of View will continue after this.