Evil has already been defeated; good has already won. God’s side cannot possibly lose, but still evil attracts many to its side.
If everyone were given the opportunity to choose sides–good or evil–like is done in a schoolyard or neighborhood pickup game–and if before choosing we already knew which team was certain to win–some would still pick the losing team. It is a puzzlement.
We are all given that choice. Ultimately, your destiny is decided by your choice. Some may even choose without realizing it. Can you discern the winning team? How do you make your choice? Are you even aware of the choice you have made? It should not be hard, but we often complicate the decision.
Many see religious folks as conned by the simplicity of the message; they say we follow a fairy tale. They see themselves as too sophisticated to be so easily fooled, but they are often fooled themselves. They do not explicitly choose evil, but without countervailing forces they cannot help but drift towards it. Evil doesn’t have to work hard to win them. It waits patiently; roots gradually take hold as sure as those of a hundred-year-old oak. They are often well educated folks, folks we believe should know better and should be unlikely to make this fatal mistake, but in fact, the educated, most particularly the highly educated, are among the most susceptible. They rely too much on their own perspective. Their cause, if they have settled upon one, is righteous in their own minds.
The bulk of the population is good-at-heart and the battle is over their hearts and minds. Most everyone wants to do good; their life might lose meaning if they weren’t pursuing the good, the true, and the beautiful, but too many sheep are drug down the wrong path with appealing messages and pleasant sounding enticements. They listen to the arguments of both sides, as if they had equal strength and were morally equivalent. Evil wins through lies, but the lies seem like the truth. Evil casts itself as good and good as evil. It cannot win any other way. The good-at-heart begin to doubt: what is good and what is evil? Who can possibly tell in this confusing world? They take sides, perhaps too quickly, perhaps without being exposed to all sides.
These folks are your colleagues, neighbors, classmates or teammates, perhaps even family. You think you know them and you would dare anyone to challenge your assessment. They are just good people. They are the salt of the earth. You are certain of their character. How can they possibly align themselves with evil?
The problem is we have too many choices, the bulk of which are poor. We don’t always contemplate our choices. Perhaps, time gets away. It seems we are on right path; family, friends, and colleagues assure us all is well. It feels right. The vibes are good. We might never realize our mistaken judgment, or if we do, perhaps it is better to deny the mistake rather than to implicate ourselves or be forced to reconsider. Furthermore, our friends may be unhappy if we change sides.
Evil wins sometimes by hiding in plain sight. We often deny its existence. That’s just something religious nuts conjured up.
Judge them by their Fruits
Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will know them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles? Just so, every good tree bears good fruit, and a rotten tree bears bad fruit. good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. So by their fruits you will know them. (Matthew 7:15-20)
The fruits some display these days are obviously rotten, yet they double down on their words and actions. Others still defend them, and a great many vote for them.
There is a growing cult of violence in Western Civilization. It has moved from the fringes and is being embraced by the mainstream. It infects our media and our politicians, and so it spreads. If some cannot win the argument using conventional means (persuasion, debate, elections, etc.), frustration mounts, and the next natural step is violence.
Bob Vylan, a UK musician who can draw large crowds, used his platform to proselytize this past summer. During a concert, he called for death to his enemy, Israel. His call for violence was noticed and he was asked to explain. After the benefit of hindsight, Mr. Vylan still finds no fault with his own actions.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/music/articles/bob-vylan-does-not-regret-112533602.html
Bob Vylan has said that he is “not regretful” of his “death, death to the IDF” chant at Glastonbury Festival earlier this year, and said he would “do it again tomorrow, twice on Sundays.”
Bobby Vylan – frontman of the British punk duo – appeared on The Louis Theroux Podcast to speak at length about the incident and the subsequent fall-out from their performance on the West Holts stage on June 28. The chant makes reference to the Israeli Defense Forces
He had a chance to repent, to soften his message, or to send a better message altogether. Death to his enemies is quite clearly what he believes and preaches.
Vylan and his band have been banned from the US after these abhorrent comments. Call our government’s response what you may, but we don’t want such hateful protests, calling for deaths of others, infecting our youth.
At a “No Kings” protest this past October, older folks who should have more wisdom, more experience, and more sense than the younger Mr. Vylan, follow the exact same path. Their fruits are rotten also.
https://dailycaller.com/2025/10/19/no-kings-seattle-protester-says-kill-stephen-miller-brandi-kruse/
Journalist Brandi Kruse posted the video of the protester being interviewed while holding a sign which read, “Would You Like To Kill Nazis [With] Me?
“Who are you gonna kill?” Kruse asked in the video. “Nazis,” the man responded.
“Who do you define as a Nazi?” the reporter followed up, to which the man asked, “What do you mean?”
“In this context, who is a Nazi?” Kruse asked. “Stephen Miller is a Nazi,” the protestor responded.
“You’re going to kill Stephen Miller,” the reporter repeated, apparently stunned, before the protester replied, “If I had the chance, yeah, I would.”
Was this man a lone wolf, one who can be isolated from the pack so he will not influence others who are supposedly “peaceful protestors”? It appears not:
Miller and his family were forced to move from their home in Arlington, Virginia after a being targets of a harassment campaign. The intense effort included written messages like, “Stephen Miller is destroying democracy,” “No white nationalism,” and “Trans rights are human rights” on public sidewalks near his residence, along with posting flyers that reportedly listed his home address.
Memo to all Antifa supporting, No Kings protestors:
Kings still exist but in Europe and other parts of the world, but not in the USA. There are no committed white nationalists in power. There are precious few white nationalist among the population at large. You listen to those who claim otherwise; your sources are either liars or folks deluded by liars. America is a tolerant nation. Christianity is a tolerant religion. Antifa, the supposedly righteous anti-Fascist bulwark resembles fascism more than any supposed fascists they protest. We conservatives, the side you oppose, also stand for human rights for all, including transgender folks. Your side, even though you often don’t realize it, is exclusionary regarding who should have rights and who should not, those not acknowledging their white privilege being the least of us all in your side’s book. Finally, you show no sense by comparing contemporary American politics to Nazi Germany. There are no significant parallels whatsoever. You could not protest as you are today if there were true parallels.
A woman who says she moved from America to Ghana is now begging to come back to the US of A, after it turns out setting up shop in a third-world African nation rife with corruption and poverty wasn’t all it was cracked up to be.
“I would rather go back to America and deal with racism in America before I sit here in Africa and deal with the bulls*** bribery, the bulls** fraud, the bulls** scams, the bulls** too expensive, the bulls** not having no snacks, the bulls** not having no food, the bulls** electricity, the bulls** hot water, the bulls**…what’s that shit called? Coming down? The bulls** animals outside the house, it’s big ass spiders, it’s big-ass lizards, all colors you ain’t never seen before, all in the f***ing room with you, sleeping in the room with you,” the woman popped off in a video posted to social media.
Can these Candidates be Stopped?
Let us move from outraged citizens who idiotically threaten violence to save America from supposedly fascists Republicans to political leaders cut from the same cloth. Representative Jolanda Jones made a not-so-veiled threat during a CNN interview:
Texas Democrat Jolanda Jones rejected former first lady Michelle Obama’s famous mantra, “when they go low, we go high,” during a CNN interview Wednesday, vowing to fight hard against foes by going “across your neck.”
“If you hit me in my face, I’m not going to punch you back in your face. I’m going to go across your neck,” Jones said on “OutFront,” making a slashing motion across her neck.
Ms. Jones is a Texas state representative running for a U.S. House seat. Are there enough Texans stirred up about the dangers of Republicans and full of hatred towards Republicans to elect this woman? It is possible.
Does this woman actually believe this rhetoric or does she just see political advantage in it? In other words: is she herself truly evil or is she merely a pawn of evil? In either case, the problem is too many listening will mistakenly believe Democrats and Antifa are truly fighting Nazis and fascists within. If you believe your opponent to be truly evil (more than ever do as such rhetoric becomes mainstream), then any response, including a knife across the throat, is justified. Ms. Jones continued, making it clear this was no slip-up:
“We can go back-and-forth, fighting each other’s faces. You’ve got to hit hard enough where they won’t come back.”
In years past, evil would couch its rhetoric more carefully; it could not win with its intentions so openly displayed. Today, evil acts emboldened as if it thinks it is winning. Even still, it can be stopped if only we would push back and correctly label its evil rhetoric.
We hear far too much chatter today about Nazis, fascists, authoritarians, Gestapo, etc. Politicians routinely characterize opponents in the most extreme terms; it stirs up voter’s fears and brings them to the polls. We cannot have Nazis in power, for sure.
The Nazi motif brings us to Graham Platner, a gentlemen running for U.S. Senate. Twenty years ago he received a tattoo of a Totenkopf, (in German: “dead person’s head”), a symbol used in Nazi Germany. A picture of him inebriated and shirtless, the tattoo prominently displayed during a ridiculous scene at his brother’s wedding ten years ago, was released recently.
https://themainemonitor.org/platner-tattoo-nazi-totenkopf/
A leading Jewish organization called it “troubling” that Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner has a skull-and-crossbones symbol linked to Nazi paramilitary organizations on his chest.
President Trump and others are accused of being Nazis, but for actions not close to the evil perpetuated by the Nazis themselves. Trump’s critics rely on the public knowing little of history to spread this lie. Mr. Platner’s actions, however, are more substantive. Although, he has lived with the tattoo for twenty years, in 2025 he denied he knew it had been a Nazi symbol.
Is he to be believed? Nobody asked him to explain his tattoo during the last twenty years? Did he never show enough curiosity to understand its meaning or attribute it to the various armies who had adopted this bellicose symbol? I would withdraw in shame were my secret publicly revealed in this manner. He shows no shame or remorse.
Senator Bernie Sanders defended him instead: “He went through a dark period. He’s not the only one in America who has gone through a dark period.” Yes, the “old dark period” excuse! Why did Platner keep the tattoo twenty years after his dark period? Why did he have it altered (sanitized) only after it was revealed to voters in 2025 instead of all the years prior? Apparently, such actions can be overlooked if one is wearing the proper political jersey.
NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani was recently confronted and asked to disavow the the slogan: “Globalize the intifada”, intifada being a term used for Palestinian violent uprisings against Israel during the last forty years.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-globalize-intifada/683300/
he appeared on a podcast with The Bulwark’s Tim Miller, a former Republican and the sort of moderate Mamdani knows he needs to win over . . . But when Miller asked Mamdani about the pro-Palestine slogan “Globalize the intifada,” the candidate’s pragmatism and intellectual humility evaporated. “To me, ultimately, what I hear in so many is a desperate desire for equality and equal rights in standing up for Palestinian human rights,” he said.
Mr. Mamdani is hesitant to offend Palestinian homeland supporters, so he refuses to condemn the slogan’s explicit call for violence. He could support human rights for Palestinians, Jews, and others while still rejecting violence. This is a fairly standard political talking point, one easily defended.
Why can’t he disassociate calls for violence from his support for Palestinian human rights? Furthermore, why does he not reject “globalizing” such violence? Intifada, until now, referred to uprisings strictly in one small area of the Middle East. Apparently, Mr. Mamdani condones such uprisings globally. If not, why doesn’t he provide direct answers to this question? Mr. Mamdani calls for human rights for some while refusing to condemn violence against others. It is a disturbing incongruency.
Next is Jay Jones, current member of the Virginia legislature and Virginia Attorney General candidate. He sent texts wishing his political rival and his minor children dead.
Mr. Jones was displeased when another legislative colleague was honored by colleagues at a funeral he attended. He said: if those honoring this man just happen to die before he does:
“I will go to their funerals to piss on their graves. To send them out awash in something.”
It is gauche and boorish language, for sure, but his language gets progressively worse. Mr. Jones antipathy shines through as the conversation with his female legislative counterpart proceeds.
Mr. Jones then proposed a hypothetical situation: if he had two bullets who would he shoot: his Republican political opponent, Virginia House Speaker Gilbert, Adolf Hitler, or Pol Pot? Mr. Gilbert, of course, would get both bullets.
We might all play this silly game and I suppose many would choose their enemy first. Or would you? One could conclude this is tacit acknowledgement Pol Pot, Hitler and the Nazis were not so bad after all.
Ms. Coyner, the colleague he communicated with, asked for a cessation: “Please stop . . . It really bothers me when you talk about about hurting people or wishing death on them.”
However, Mr. Jones does not stop. Mr. Jones, the man-bull in a china shop ploughs ahead, following up with Ms. Coyner on the phone. His point has not yet been stated clearly enough. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j4sxhPYMSk
Jones also said Gilbert was raising little fascists and suggested suffering was necessary in order to understand the problem:
People of principle don’t modify principles when personally affected. Right is right and wrong is wrong no matter circumstances. It is not a principle to start with if it is abandoned when there is difficultly. If Jones were a man of principle himself, he would understand this. Jones is also a father himself. Why does he raise this specter with regard to others’ children?
https://www.newsweek.com/what-did-jay-jones-say-full-text-messages-10834123
Calling Out Evil
The Virginia Democrat gubernatorial candidate, Abagail Spanberger, was asked to disassociate from Mr. Jones’s comments during a televised debate. Ms. Spanberger remained silent for nearly a minute as her opponent repeatedly asked for a response.
After Charlie Kirk was assassinated in September, numerous politicians and media blamed him for his own death. He was called a racist, full of hatred, a fascist, and more. He provoked the public, they say. This is also boorish and disrespectful, not to mention untrue. Still, his critics are allowed to say these things. If Kirk had remained silent altogether, then yes, he would be alive today, but remaining silent is not the principled response. Ms. Spanberger avoided offending and alienating some voters by not criticizing Mr. Jones; perhaps it will aid her election, but it was unprincipled.
The actions I highlight are patently evil. I should not have to persuade anyone of that. The people highlighted may not be evil themselves, but they allow evil to flourish and expand. Bob Vylan, Jolanda Jones, Jay Jones, and Graham Platner promote evil through their words and actions. Senator Sanders, Mr. Mamdani, and Ms. Spanberger refuse to condemn evil. Evil loses every time we shine a light on it. Let’s all do that simple and courageous act, and for God’s sake do not elect these people to office.
Update November 7, 2025
Zohran Mamdani and Jay Jones won their elections despite their horrible rhetoric. Abagail Spanberger also won resoundingly despite her failure to condemn her colleague’s actions. Graham Platner was not on the ballot this November, but polls show him leading two-time governor Janet Mills. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-election/senate-democrats-maine-senate-primary-graham-platner-janet-mills-rcna239396 At least, Jolanda Jones lost her primary.
The media calls these candidates words and actions “controversial”. They want to downplay all of this because they can’t stand to see their own side lose any election. Again, let’s call it what it is: evil.
Dave https://seek-the-truth.com/about/
https://seek-the-truth.com/category/faith/
https://seek-the-truth.com
Seek the Truth 