Refuting The Lies of "Pastor" Matt Chandler's White Privilege Propaganda
Tonight, on the Worldview Weekend Hour, should a pastor be promoting "white privilege"? What is "white privilege"? What if I told you "white privilege" is anti-America, anti-family, anti-Christian worldview, anti-capitalist, pro-LGBTQ, and pro-gender neutrality?
What if I also told you the goal of "white privilege" is that of the socialists and the Marxists and the communists? What if I also told you "white privilege" is the agenda of destroying Christianity and capitalism at the same time, fulfilling the goal of Karl Marx, who said, "My object in life is to dethrone God and destroy capitalism"?
And so I ask you, why are some of America's most well-known neo-evangelicals and neo-Calvinists, such as Matt Chandler, promoting "white privilege"? You'll hear the video clips and see them yourself tonight. And then we'll expose the religious Trojan horse of Matt Chandler, his Village Church, and the new Calvinists. The Worldview Weekend Hour begins right now.
[Introduction and announcer]
Welcome. Thank you for joining us on the Worldview Weekend Hour. I'm Brannon Howse. We're picking up part 2 on Matt Chandler and his worldview. Now, why does it matter? Because as we saw last week, Matt Chandler is a very popular neo-Calvinist. And in fact, he is the president of Acts 29, which is an organization that plants churches all throughout America.
Since our last broadcast, we've received emails from several people thanking us for our broadcast because there are Acts 29 churches coming into their area. And now they know to be very aware of the philosophy, worldview, and theology of these churches being planted by Acts 29 in their area. Again, Matt Chandler is the president, at the time we're broadcasting, of Acts 29.
He's also speaking at many conferences, such as that like Together for the Gospel, which in April of 2018 will reportedly have some 20,000 people attending. He'll be sharing the platform with many people, including a man that he claims influenced him greatly. At least, that's what he told Mark Driscoll in a 2012 interview: that John Piper influenced him greatly. He'll also be sharing the platform with Al Mohler. And he'll be sharing the platform with many other well-known evangelicals, including John MacArthur.
Why are leading evangelicals giving credibility to men like Matt Chandler and John Piper over and over by sharing the platform with them at Bible conferences. How can certain pastors be critical of Rick Warren and then share the platform with Rick Warren 2.0 for the next generation; Matt Chandler? How can these pastors share the platform with John Piper at Together For the Gospel when clearly John Piper has a false gospel as we have documented.
Well, let's talk tonight about Matt Chandler and his promotion of "white privilege." Let's go right away to the first clip of Matt Chandler. Watch this.
Matt Chandler: So, growing up, here's what that looked like for me. When I sat in school growing up and learned about the history of the United States of America, I opened up our books, I had to write reports – I saw in those books and read the stories of and wrote reports on people who looked like me. And then when I turned on the television, by and large, at any moment in time when I turned on the television, what I saw was people looked like me. And then when I got magazines or when I got books or when I played with toys or – what I saw repeatedly were people that looked like me. At almost any given moment, I was surrounded by people who looked almost just like me. And so, really, the entire experience of my life has been one of I can easily find people that look like me, almost all my understanding of what made America great is because of efforts and the work ethic of people like me. And I come from a lower-class, Anglo family, and so my story is kind of the American dream, pulled myself up by my bootstraps, worked hard, learned to work hard for my daddy, yada, yada, yada, right? I could go on and on there. But what happens in that kind of upbringing, which is fine – [end quote]
If he says that kind of upbringing is fine, then what is he whining about? If that kinda upbringing is fine, then why is he complaining? What's he lecturing us about?
He also says that he comes from a – came from a low-income family. Well, as you're gonna hear in some of our next clips, he claims to benefit from white privilege. He has this natural toolbox he can pull from that others don't have that's due to his white privilege. Well, if he comes from a lower-income family, and yet he had, as he said, to pull himself up by his bootstraps, doesn't that disprove he did not have some kind of white privilege? I mean, wouldn't he, if he came from a white privilege, come from a privileged background, not a low-income background? So hasn't Mr. Matt Chandler just discredited his entire argument?
Now, in addition, he says that when he was growing up – and I've done some research on him, and it appears as though he spent a lot of time growing up in Texas, and he played football, as I understand it. And he says he was surrounded by a lot of people that look like him. First of all, I have a hard time believing that. You're telling me that in Texas, he grew up playing football and none of his fellow teammates were anything other than white? There were no black players on the team? There were no Hispanic players on the team, in Texas? I highly doubt that.
He then says that pretty much everyone he came in contact with looked like him. I don't believe it, number one. Number two, if that is the case, what's that say about the diversity that his parents were placing him in and around? I don't know about you, but many times growing up, my family deliberately had all kinds of people over for dinner after church so that our family might get to know people from all kinds of different backgrounds and people groups.
So, again, if he lived in some kind of white haven and surrounded only by a bunch of white people, is that our fault? But I'm not buying it. In fact, he goes on to talk about how the magazines he would look at, the toys he would play with, what he would learn in school were all basically people that looked like him. Again, I'm not buying it. And one reason why is, he and I are about the same age, and when I went to high school and graduated in 1988, my textbooks were not filled with just a bunch of white guys that look like me.
In fact, quickly I was able to take out some typing paper, and off the top of my head, I was able to write down some of the people that I would've studied in my history books, or what became known as social studies, and I was able to come up with some of the people I studied that were not white. Now, I don't know what kinda school he went to or what kinda textbooks Matt Chandler was reading growing up, but I venture to guess they were very similar to the textbooks that most Americans at that time used from one end of this country to the other, and it wasn't filled with a bunch of white guys.
You would've studied people like, as I came up in my list, Martin Luther King Jr.; Rosa Parks; Booker T. Washington – by the way, all black Americans – Harriet Tubman; George Washington Carver; Thurgood Marshall, who went on to the US Supreme Court; Christopher Columbus – Christopher Columbus was not Anglo. He was not an Anglo European. He was Italian. Gandhi.
How about the Native Americans that helped out the Pilgrims? Did he not study about that? How about Sacajawea, who helped to lead the adventures and work of Lewis and Clark? How about Squanto, who helped the Pilgrims survive – an Indian, Native American Indian. How about Jesse Owens? These are some of the names I was able to come up with immediately that I would've studied in my textbooks, social studies/history books, that were not white Americans.
So, again, frankly, I believe Matt Chandler makes up a lot of stuff. Now, you may be wondering why I believe that. Between this week and next week you're gonna see clips, and I think you, too, will come to the conclusion that Matt Chandler just makes it up to fit his radical worldview. Watch this next clip.
Matt Chandler: And so if I could kinda just be straight at what I'm talking about, is that I have grown up with this invisible kind of bag of privilege, this kind of invisible toolkit, that I can reach in there at any given moment and have this type of privilege that a lot of other brothers and sisters don't have, don't possess. And so what happens when you have my upbringing, and even my current reality, is that you're forced to – if you're not careful, if you don't let the gospel kind of purify your heart, if you don't lean on the word of God to shape your understandings, you begin to judge harshly those who can't quite get to where you are, and you will begin to see that getting people to where you are is what's normative. [end quote]
All right, so I would ask this. Number one, if he has this invisible bag of privilege, then how was it that he was one that, as he admitted, came from a low-income family? Wouldn't the fact that he has this invisible bag of privilege mean that he would not come from a low-income family? So I don't understand that.
Number two, notice he then throws in the gospel. What is very common, I've noticed for a lot of these guys, is they spew all kinds of liberalism, all kinds of fallacies, all kinds of liberal talking points, all kinds of philosophies-of-the-day that are not according to Christ, and then they try to purify all that garbage by dropping in the word "gospel." It's like a tagline that somehow, now that they've added the word "gospel" to all the garbage and lies they've just spewed, and misinformation and propaganda, that somehow that cleanses all that garbage. It doesn't.
Sadly, for many of these guys, I find the word "gospel," "gospel," "gospel" is used all the time as simply a tagline to try to give credibility to the garbage they're selling, the liberal garbage they're selling. It's become, unfortunately, a tagline, and it's very offensive.
Matt Chandler: And so what happens when you have my upbringing, and even my current reality, is that you're forced to – if you're not careful, if you don't let the gospel kind of purify your heart, if you don't lean on the word of God to shape your understandings, you begin to judge harshly those who can't quite get to where you are, and you will begin to see that getting people to where you are is what's normative. [end quote]
He goes on to say that we need to come to understand that what is normative is helping other people get to where we are. That is not normative. We live in a country where we have equal opportunity, but not equal outcomes. Not everyone can get to the same level. That's socialism.
And so Matt Chandler is wrong to say that it is normative to assume that everyone can get to our level. There are those that can, and there are those who can't. But when he says you have to be careful not to judge those who can't get to your level, can't get to where you're at – because I guess we look around, we see people of a different people group, we have to assume, well, they can't get to where we are. Why would we assume that? Why would we assume that someone of a different people group can't get to where we're at? They can. Some of them indeed can. They can work hard and they can surpass where Matt Chandler is at.
But it's not normative to assume that everyone can get to that same spot, because not everyone is dealing with the same set of gifts or abilities. For instance, I'm 5'6". I cannot play for the NBA. I cannot slam dunk a basketball. So I was never going to achieve the goal of being an NBA superstar. Can't do it. I also don't have the mathematical ability or skills to be an architect or an engineer. I was born with dyslexia. Abstract issues or math or complex math just was not possible.
Now, I have strengths in other areas that other people don't. But there is nothing that says we all have to be the same, or helping everyone get to where we're at is the norm. If you're an engineer tonight, or you're an architect tonight, you could never get me to where you are as an architect or an engineer. It's not gonna happen. But at the same time, some of you would never wanna sit in front of a bank of cameras and teach like I'm doing now. You would not wanna get up in front of 1,000 people, 2,000 people, and speak. You would not wanna do live radio, speaking to thousands of people. You just wouldn't wanna do it. And in some cases you would claim you couldn't do it, it's not your skill set.
So the point is this: it is not normative to assume we can get everyone to the same level or to our level. Some people will get to our level, whatever that might be, and they will surpass us. They will go on to become extremely wealthy people. But then there are others that will not get to the same economic level that you or I might be at, because of this thing called sin. And they give in to the sin of either laziness, drugs, alcohol, procrastination. And so they don't reap the benefits because of sin.
So, you see, we have a country that offers equal opportunity, but there is no guarantee for equal outcomes, and it's not normative, as Matt Chandler says – it's not normative to say that we must try to get everyone to our level or where we're at. We could certainly try to help people along the way. But it's not normative to think everyone's gonna be the same. The only way everyone could be the same or have equal outcomes is lowering the standard, or socialism.
So, again, the things he's saying don't even make sense. They don't make common sense. Watch this next clip.
Matt Chandler: So white privilege isn't overt racism, right? Instead, it's just this unique kind of experience of life in predominant culture. So, again, let's go back and talk about it. Growing up, throughout your history books, if you learned anything other than "white people built and made America great," it was during the month of February, it was condensed, and it was kind of a millimeter of depth of really what other kind of ethnicities contributed to what's now modern-day America. [end quote]
That's 100 percent false. We already went through the list of the people that I studied in my textbooks, and that was just a few of them. So to say that you only studied about the contributions white people made to America, that is absolutely wrong. Again, we have studied about Booker T. Washington, Harriet Tubman, George Washington Carver, Thurgood Marshall, Christopher Columbus. We studied about Jesse Owens, Squanto. We studied about Sacajawea. This is just a very, very, very quick list.
So, again, he's just making stuff up, I believe. Again, I don't know who published his textbooks or what kinda school he went to, but most of us growing up in his age bracket certainly did not study some lilywhite, all-white-man history of America. It just is not the way it went down for his generation and my generation, and he and I are about the same age, so I think he just makes this stuff up. Watch this next clip.
Matt Chandler: And even if you are – and then when you open up your newspaper or you grab a magazine, you're gonna see Anglos portrayed mostly in a positive sense, right? If you go to buy your kids toys or go to buy them a little book, it's gonna be pretty easy to just find kids that look like them on the cover. So we don't know what it's like to have to look around Barnes & Noble's for 15 minutes trying to find a book about a little girl growing up that looks like our little girl, or like a little boy growing up that looks like our little boy. We've never had to struggle with that. We don't get anxious every time we open up a newspaper about how we'll be portrayed. [end quote]
All right, there's so many things there we need to address as well. First of all, he says Anglos are portrayed positively, normally, when you open up your newspaper. Really? So the white American male is often portrayed very positively in your local newspapers and the national newspapers? Now, there's actually been a war on the white American male for years, and particularly if they're a Christian. In fact, I would go so far as to say there has been a war on all men, regardless of the people group they come from, particularly if they're conservative or Christians.
So, again, his idea if you open up your newspaper you'll see Anglo Americans portrayed very positively – no, generally, that has not been the case at all. Then he says that then you have the issue of going to Barnes & Noble and walking around trying to find books that look like your kids, and games that look like your kids. I don't know what is with this guy, because I think he, again, just makes stuff up. Because if you go to Barnes & Noble, the issue isn't trying to find books that indeed are being marketed to a cross section of families with various backgrounds, whether white, Asian, black, Indian, Hispanic. These publishers are indeed publishing books that cater to various people groups. Go to Barnes & Noble, look around, you'll find it.
What I challenge you to find is a book at Barnes & Noble that portrays a conservative Christian family with Christian values, or even just a conservative family that is intact. Try to find a book for children that has a mom and a dad, that embraces traditional values. That is increasingly hard to find. Again, if you go back to the early '90s, there were books like Heather Has Two Mommies, Daddy's Roommate, and many others books being published that fulfilled the new radical demand of diversity no matter how perverse.
So this idea that when you go to Barnes & Noble, people are gonna have a hard time finding books or games that look like their kids, that's not true. And in fact, when he talks about trying to find a game or a doll for someone, did you know that the black baby dolls were produced going back to the 1900s? I looked it up. Going back to the early 1900s, manufacturers started producing and selling black baby dolls. And if you remember the 1980s, the Cabbage Patch Kids were very popular, and you could get those as white babies, Asian babies, black babies, Hispanic babies. There was diversity there. So, again, I don't know what fantasy world he's living in, but I think he's absolutely just making stuff up.
Then he says when you open your newspaper, you don't have to worry how you're gonna be portrayed. Really? Has he read what the newspapers have said about Christians lately? Has he read the newspaper clippings from some of the cities that Shahram Hadian and I have been to, where we're called radicals, extremists?
How about in 1996, when I spoke in Chattanooga to what I was then told was the largest school board meeting in the history of Hamilton County? I spoke to over 1,200 parents for over an hour. In the Chattanooga Free Press and the Chattanooga Times, I was described as an extremist. I was described as an extremist comparable to that of the Ku Klux Klan and the blacklisting of the 1950s. I was compared to a terrorist who came to town with a gun in his belt, I guess trying to compare me to, at the time, the Palestinian Liberation leader Yasser Arafat. Are you kidding me? His statement that you don't have to worry about opening up the paper and seeing how you're portrayed? The Christian male in America is portrayed horribly over and over. The conservative, regardless of whether a Christian or not, conservatives are portrayed horribly over and over in the newspaper.
So, again, I believe Matt Chandler just makes it up as he goes along, to fit his radical worldview. Watch this next clip.
Matt Chandler: These are aspects of – it's an invisible air that we breathe, the type of lens that we wear. So what happens is, when things blow up, we can look at African Americans or Asians or Hispanics, and because of the lenses in which we wear and how we've been shaped by this invisible force, we tend to expect "Why can't they just...?", "Why won't they...?" And what we're saying in that moment is we're harshly judging and we're expecting – if they would just look like us, if they would just do what we've done, then none of this would happen. And it's a really kind of terrible judgmental place to sit. [end quote]
Well, that's interesting 'cause he's apparently sitting in a very judgmental place, assuming what all of us believe: that if we would just say to these folks, when something blows up, "Well, if they would just look like us and act like us, it'd all be fine." Who is saying that? Who is saying that, Matt Chandler? Who are you preaching at? Yourself?
Again, he's just making stuff up, I think, to fit his radical agenda. What's really sad, though, is the guy doesn't seem to understand that he is promoting an ideology that is really about socialism. Redistribution of wealth. Class warfare. Race baiting. Pitting people against each other. This is what "white privilege" is – again, anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-capitalist, anti-family.
In fact, the Frankfurt School, who came here to America in 1933 at the invitation of John Dewey – the Frankfurt School – they openly stated that they believe the source of all oppression and suffering was biblical Christianity and capitalism. That's what they openly wrote. The Frankfurt School, they openly wrote that the source of all suffering and oppression was Christianity and capitalism. "White privilege" is simply another masking term for socialism, for feminism, for anti-Christian values. And Matt Chandler, of the Village Church, I'm afraid, has become the village-useful idiot. In fact, if you don't understand the Frankfurt School, then you might wanna get my book Grave Influence. The man that coined the phrase "make love, not war" was Herbert Marcuse of the Frankfurt School.
And so what Matt Chandler is promoting is the worldview of people that say all suffering and oppression stems from Christianity and capitalism. Now, is that something a pastor should be doing? Do you think he knows what he's doing? No, I think he's probably, again, being used and doesn't know it.
So Matt Chandler, again, I believe, is really, by promoting "white privilege," promoting the agenda of the Frankfurt School, who are admitted cultural Marxists. They were admitted Marxists, and they promoted what is called cultural Marxism. They said we have to change the culture; once we change the culture, we can then implement real Marxism. But, they said, first we must destroy the American male. We must replace a patriarchal society with a matriarchal society. We must destroy men.
And that's why when he says when you open up the newspaper, you're likely to see someone that looks like you, and you don't really have to worry what's gonna be said about you if you're an Anglo American – baloney. The Frankfurt School set out in the early 1930s to come here and infiltrate and to destroy the American male, particularly if they were conservative or Christian, and to replace a patriarchal society with a matriarchal society where men were not needed. Then the family would be cared for not by a man, not by a husband, not by a father, but by the government. And so as they would grow the government, that would implement socialism, the economic philosophy of Karl Marx. Socialism is the economic philosophy of Karl Marx. This is what the Frankfurt School openly said.
Then they said after they destroy a patriarchal society and replace it with a matriarchal society, ultimately their goal would be to end all genders – no femininity, no masculinity, just a general "humanness." Isn't that what we have today, with LGBTQ? Just a general humanness. It started with the Frankfurt School. And the ideals of the Frankfurt School have been embodied in what Matt Chandler is promoting: "white privilege." If you doubt me, then watch this next clip.
Female: Where critical race theory helps us is it says, okay, it's not – you can't just look at the face. Clarence Thomas is on the Supreme Court. Does he really replace Thurgood Marshall?
[Laughter]
He's an embarrassment and a disgrace to the memory of Thurgood Marshall, and if I met Clarence Thomas, I'd call him that to his face. That's 'cause I have something called tenure.
[Laughter]
And even then they'd try to fire you, right. “
Female: No, you wouldn't get away with that one. He's so bad.
Female: But global white privilege is – unfortunately, the president is the face of global white privilege, too. Does having a black president change that? Has it changed that? Unfortunately it hasn't, is it? He ends up being the front man for the system. So instead of just saying, "Oh, we're happy there's a black face in the White House, who's running the White House instead of just serving in the White House," it's like, no, the master's house is now got a black face, but it's still the master's house. He works for the master of the system of white privilege. [end quote]
Now, see, that is undercover footage from the 15th Annual White Privilege Educators Conference in Madison, Wisconsin, a few years ago from ProgressivesToday.com. They went undercover and filmed it. I'm gonna show you some more of their clips from that conference.
But notice what this woman is saying: white privilege is not about what color your skin is, because it doesn't matter that you have Clarence Thomas, a black American, on the US Supreme Court, because he doesn't agree with their worldview. Is he a legitimate replacement, she said, of Thurgood Marshall? No.
So it's not that "hey, we got another black American on the US Supreme Court, good for us, we're making progress." No, Clarence doesn't count, because Clarence is a capitalist, Clarence is too conservative. So it doesn't matter his color of his skin.
Does it matter that we have a black president? At the time, Barack Obama was president. That's who she's speaking of. Does it matter? No, because he's really, simply, the face of white privilege on a global scale. In other words, Barack Obama wasn't radical enough for them. Barack Obama was not radical enough for them. They don't care what color his skin is. It's not about the color of your skin or the advancement of minority groups; it's about the advancement of their socialism, their Marxism.
So when Matt Chandler talks about white privilege is about us – part of the problem with white privilege is we grow up with all these people that look like us and there's no diversity in the color of skin, that's not what it's about. It's not about the color of your skin; it's about your worldview.
And Matt Chandler unfortunately, because he doesn't understand these issues, is being used, I believe. And that's what's very, very concerning: that the pastor of a church, the Village Church, has become, I believe, the village idiot for the globalists and the Marxists by pushing their white-privilege lies.
That men such as John MacArthur would share the platform with this guy over and over in 2014, 2016, and 2018 at the Together For the Gospel Conference is shocking, unacceptable, and discouraging. Is MacArthur going to share the platform with Rick Warren next? Chandler is Rick Warren 2.0 for the next generation. MacArthur had plenty to say against Warren but now Chandler gets a pass because he is popular with the Calvinists? In fact, John MacArthur's Executive Director of Grace to You wrote an article going after John Piper for having Rick Warren at his Desiring God conference. Yet, it is ok for MacArthur to repeatedly speak at a conference with Rick Warren 2.0? Of course this is the same Executive Director of Grace to You that declared on social media that Jesus was involved in interfaith dialogue. Others may make excuses for MacArthur but as an independent broadcaster I do not play those games. Right is still right if no one is doing it and wrong is wrong even if John MacArthur is doing it.
It is sad that Matt Chandler is the head of Acts 29 that's planting these new Calvinist, social-justice churches all over the country. And that's why this program is necessary to warn of such men that have risen from within. Watch this next clip from the 15th Annual White Privilege Conference.
Male: So what do I mean by "Christian hegemony"? Very simply, I define it as the everyday, pervasive, deep-seated, and institutionalized dominance of Christian values, Christian institutions, leaders, and Christians as a group, primarily for the benefit of Christian ruling elites. So that's very similar to how we might define racism or sexism or other systems of oppression.
So if you have Christian values and adhere to a Christian worldview, you are promoting a form of racism and white privilege. You getting the understanding here, what white privilege is really all about? Watch this next clip.
Female: So in this particular study, it showed that if you were more inclined to free-market capitalism, you had higher tendency of holding ethnocentric values. For me, capitalism is like the all-consuming thing: capitalism maintains white supremacy, white privilege, racism, sexism, patriarchy, heteronormativity. You name it – capitalism. [end quote]
So if you're a capitalist, you're a racist. This is what "white privilege" teaches. Again I ask, why is neo-Calvinist Matt Chandler promoting the talking point of the globalists, the socialists, the Marxists, the race baiters, the change agents?
If "white privilege" is really true, why do we see so many white people in poverty in America? You notice that? If "white privilege" is true, and people of color cannot advance, how did we end up with President Barack Hussein Obama? How did we end up with an attorney general by the name of Eric Holder? How did we end up with Thurgood Marshall or Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court? How did we end up with Condoleezza Rice as secretary of state in the George Bush administration? How did we end up with Colin Powell during the Reagan administration and, if I remember correctly, he was chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, and then he went on in George W. Bush's administration to be secretary of state. These are all black Americans. If "white privilege" is true, how did they get where they are? If we're an inherently racist nation, how did they get where they are?
You see, this is the lie. How about black congressmen, men and women? How about black governors, black senators, black mayors? How about black athletes that make millions and millions of dollars? You see, we can prove the lies of "white privilege."
How about Asians? Have you looked at the advancement of Asians in America? Or how about Indians who come here from India? Within one generation, have you seen where their children are? Now, again, this proves there's no such thing as white privilege. Why is Matt Chandler not talking about Asian privilege or Indian privilege? Because the Indians and the Asians are kicking it all over the white folks when it comes to education; work ethic, largely; and, thus, income. But I don't hear Matt Chandler talking about Asian or Indian privilege.
Let's look at some stats. Here's an article titled "The White Privilege Lie" by Dennis Prager. He says, "According to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, white men, whom the Left argue are the most privileged group of all in America, commit seven of every ten suicides in America – even though only three of ten Americans are white males." So in other words, if being a white American is so easy and so unencumbered by any challenges, why are so many of them committing suicide?
He goes on to say, "Second, there are a host of privileges that dwarf 'white privilege.' A huge one is Two-Parent Privilege. If you are raised by a father and a mother, you entered adulthood with more privileges than anyone else in American society, irrespective of race, ethnicity, or sex. That's why the poverty rate among two-parent black families is only 7 percent. Compare that to a 22 percent poverty rate among whites in single-parent homes. Obviously the two-parent home is the decisive privilege."
He says, "Another 'privilege,' if wants to use that term, that dwarfs 'white privilege' is Asian privilege. Asian Americans do better than white Americans in school, on IQ tests, on credit scores, and on other positive parameters. In fact, according to recent data from the Federal Reserve, Asians are about to surpass whites as the wealthiest group of Americans. Will the Left soon complain about Asian privilege?"
How about this, an article entitled "Thomas Sowell Deconstructs Diversity Dogma"? Thomas Sowell, of course, is a black American. This is an article by Lloyd Billingsley. He says, "Sowell shows groups that have lagged behind have advanced themselves by various means, primarily hard work. But in the race industry, accredited victims only advance by means of some government affirmative action program, code for racial preference or quotas. Any problems with advancement 'are due primarily, if not solely, to the malaise of other people.' Sowell sees this leading to a 'never-ending cycle of revenge, the Hatfields and the McCoys writ large, with a whole society caught in the crossfire.'"
Here is an article from CNBC.com. It's entitled "How Asian Americans Are Transforming the Face of US Wealth": "US citizens of Asian descent have made sizable gains in income and wealth in the past 25 years, so much that they are on pace to eclipse whites as the wealthiest group of Americans, according to new data from the Federal Reserve." So, my friends, if "white privilege" is true, why are Asians doing so well?
The article continues: "However, Asian American wealth had 'changed dramatically' since 1989, the bank said, with the demographic's middle-income group already overtaking that of Caucasians. This is due, in late measure, to what it calls 'the remarkable increase in educational attainment by younger Asians in recent decades,'" end quote. "According to Bill Emmons, an economist at the St. Louis Fed, Asian Americans may in fact become the wealthiest ethnic group in the US within the next few decades." My friends, this proves "white privilege" is a lie. Look at how well the Asians are doing, as well as the Indians from India.
Here's an article: "Indian Americans Have Highest Median Income of US Asian Population, Says Pew Research Study." The article says, "The Pew Research Center September 8th unveiled key findings from a study of the Asian population is diverse, with 20 million Asian Americans tracking their roots to more than 20 countries in the Indian subcontinent, as well as East and Southeast Asia. The median annual household income of households headed by Asian Americans is $73,060, compared with $53,600 among all US households, the study found."
"Additionally, the study found that Asians overall were less likely than the general US population to live in poverty in 2015. About half of Asians age 25 and older have a bachelor's degree or more, compared with 30 percent of all Americans this age, the study found. Indians" – meaning from India – "have the highest level of educational attainment among Asian Americans, with 72 percent holding a bachelor's degree or more in 2015."
So, you see, it seems as though there's no such thing as white privilege. The Asians and the Indians prove there is no such thing as white privilege. The Indians and Asians are doing better than white Americans. We do see there's an advantage to those who work hard, who get a good education, although not everyone has to go on to get further education past high school to succeed. Many, many millionaires do not have a college education, but they have something other than further education: they have a strong work ethic. They have a great skill at being entrepreneurs.
So the privilege isn't what people group they're from. The privilege or what's advancing them is their hard work; their education; do they come from a two-parent family; have they learned life lessons of perseverance, hard work, saving, how to manage money; and do they stay out of trouble.
These, again, go back to the incubator of the home, the family. The founding fathers in America said that the family was the incubator for the maintaining of a constitutional republic. And of course, that is why the Frankfurt School, through their cultural Marxism, set out to destroy the American family. They knew if they could destroy the family through easy divorce, no-fault divorce, feminism – which is anti-family/anti-father – the growing of the welfare state, they could destroy not only the American family, but they could also cause many people not to wanna go to work when they can stay at home and get a check. And that's why there was the expansion of the welfare system.
So all of these things have led to the destruction of the American family, the incubator for passing on the values and ideas and worldview that maintain a free constitutional republic based on hard work and free-market capitalism.
So, you see, it's not white privilege that's the problem. It's really the issue of sin. It's also the issue of people – some – who have more skills than others, because we're not all equal. We will not all obtain the same level of success. We will not all obtain the same level of income. Different people with different abilities do different things and have different outcomes. Now, there's equal opportunity in America, but there are not equal outcomes.
One of the leading reasons for poverty in America is not due to someone's people group. We have people in poverty from all people groups. We have people advancing, and are multimillionaires, from all people groups. Look at the number of black Americans that are multimillionaires today. Millionaires. Look at the number of black Americans that are millionaires. There's quite an increase. This proves the lie of "white privilege."
But what is it that creates poverty across all people lines? Well, we've already looked at some of them. One of them is moral relativism, situational ethics: "if it feels good, do it." This has created amazing amounts of poverty.
In fact, there's a book written by a doctor that worked in the hospitals and prisons of Europe, and he was a psychiatrist. I don't believe he was a Christian, but he wrote a book called Life at the Bottom: The Worldview That Creates the Underclass. Look at what he wrote: "Of nothing is there more true than the system of sexual relations that now prevails in the underclass, with the result that 70 percent of the births in my hospital are now illegitimate, a figure that would approach 100 percent if it were not for the presence in the area of a large number of immigrants from the Indian subcontinent." Well, that's interesting; let's just stop right there. Doesn't that just fit in with what we saw, from 2015, about Indians? They get married. They stay together. They get an education, or they get a basic education and then they work hard as entrepreneurs.
I talked to a – not to fall into stereotypes, but I talked to a man from India that purchased – came to America and within a few years had purchased his first gas station in America. And then he worked. He and his wife worked incredibly hard, and then they bought their next gas station. And pretty soon their land and their store has great value, and on paper they have a net worth of over $1 million. They came here with nothing. Nothing. This is the story of immigrants in America. And they're not white Americans; they're immigrants. They're people of color. "White privilege" is a lie.
But notice this doctor here who wrote Life at the Bottom is saying that the stats are not as low as they would be in his area, because of the Indians who get married and stay married. So he says, "...a figure that would approach 100 percent if it were not for the presence in the area of a large number of immigrants from the Indian subcontinent. The connection between this loosening and the misery of my patients is so obvious that it requires considerable intellectual sophistication (and dishonesty) to be able to deny it.
"The climate of moral, cultural, and intellectual relativism – a relativism that began as a mere fashionable plaything for intellectuals – has been successfully communicated to those least able to resist its devastating practical effects."
So in other words, my friends, the intelligentsia have taught our kids "if it feels good, do it." "There are no wrong answers." Moral relativism, situational ethics. "Do whatever you want to do. Pleasure. Seek pleasure. Don't listen to authority."
You see, this is not by mistake. These are the ideals that have come into our educational system through the Frankfurt School, who sought to destroy America from within. And it started by their declaring that the source of all suffering and oppression was Christianity and capitalism.
Remember what Karl Marx said: "My object in life is to dethrone God and destroy capitalism." So we've seen that Matt Chandler is 100 percent wrong to be promoting the lie of the socialists, the Marxists, the globalists, the feminists, of white privilege.
Next week we'll watch video clips as Matt Chandler and John Piper praise Martin Luther King Jr. Matt Chandler says Martin Luther King Jr. was a brother – meaning a Christian – that he stood on the word of God and the application of the word of God.
My friends, you will hear a lot of audio and video clips that you probably have never seen, most Americans have never seen, that proves that Martin Luther King Jr. did not really care about civil rights. He was simply using the civil rights movement as a vehicle for his democratic socialism.
In fact, Martin Luther King Jr. was warned in a meeting in the Rose Garden, one on one, a private meeting, with himself and the president of the United States, Robert Kennedy – John F. Kennedy, excuse me, John F. Kennedy. He was warned that he was surrounded by known communists, and he refused to fire them.
You'll hear video and audio clips of Martin Luther King Jr. calling for restructuring our capitalist system and nationalizing many things. You'll hear from many radicals today, like Cornel West and others, who say that Martin Luther King Jr.'s image has been remade, that he was really a radical and we need to get back to his radical socialist democratic agenda.
The communists set out to infiltrate the civil rights movement, hijack it for their own cause. Ask yourself: why is it that so few people from the civil rights era who are conservatives are ever shown as being great Americans, people that were for the Second Amendment, maybe worked with the National Rifle Association or supported Ronald Reagan? 'Cause I can show you a civil rights leader that did all those things, and yet you never hear the liberal media or the educrats talking about this man, do you? Because, you see, the civil rights movement desired to accomplish some great things and to correct some serious problems in the country. But the communists, like so many times, came along and they hijacked it with Martin Luther King Jr.
And we're gonna see next week that not only are we having pastors promote "white privilege," the lie of "white privilege," but we're seeing pastors like John Piper and Matt Chandler proclaim as someone the church should learn from and someone that stood on the authority of the word of God, such as Martin Luther King Jr., when the reality is Martin Luther King Jr. was a very, very immoral man. We'll show that to you, even from books written by friends of his, and that he embraced socialism. Why on earth are Christian pastors in America holding up as a hero someone that is the very antithesis of a biblical worldview?
You see, unfortunately, many Americans have been played as fools, an information operation, a propaganda war of the left. And while we might appreciate some of the things Martin Luther King Jr. attempted to do, the facts are overwhelming: that is not what he was really interested in – civil rights – because if he was, he would've listened to President Kennedy and fired the communists around him. President Kennedy told him outright, "If you don't fire these communists around you, it could sink the entire civil rights agenda you're working for." I contend if Martin Luther King Jr. really cared about the civil rights movement, he would've fired those known communists around him in a heartbeat. But he didn't.
So, again, I believe Martin Luther King Jr. is not someone that cared about the civil rights, but hijacked the civil rights movement, just like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and others have done today. And Christians should not be looking to Martin Luther King Jr. to solve any racial issues we have in America. They should be looking to the authority of the word of God. And yet John Piper and Matt Chandler continue to tell us how we need to look to men like Martin Luther King Jr. for the church to know how to deal with any racial issues in America today. No, we need to look to the word of God in the Book of Acts, where it says "We are of one blood."
We need to understand where the different people groups come from. We need to understand that there is only one race: the human race. And maybe there's two: the saved race and the unsaved race.
But, my friends, men like John Piper and Matt Chandler, who have risen from within, are carrying the water, whether they know it or not, for the socialists, the cultural Marxists, and the communists. They have become a threat to the church, useful idiots, a religious Trojan horse, I believe. And that's why we do this broadcast: to warn the church.
If you appreciate this broadcast, and I hope you'll tune in for next week's program, then we need to have you support us in one of two ways. One is by your joining the Situation Room at SituationRoom.net, which automatically makes you available to have access to our biblical online worldview software, Worldviewpedia.com. The second way is through our Worldview Weekend Foundation. You can donate online, make a tax-deductible contribution, or you can send a check. Our mailing address is on the screen.
Please, support us in one of two ways. We produce all of these programs and make them available free of charge to everyone. After a few weeks, they get rolled into the Situation Room. But to make them available costs thousands of dollars. We spend over $2,000.00 a month just in bandwidth and computer services that allow for us to stream. Over $2,000.00 a month, every month, just to be able to stream this information out to you, that we have to pay to streaming companies. That doesn't count all our other expenses, which I won't get into tonight.
Television is very expensive. We need your help. We're one of the few independent broadcast networks that doesn't play to the good-ol'-boy club. If you want to maintain this independent broadcast network and all the programs we offer, we seriously need to hear from you right now, by your joining the Situation Room at SituationRoom.net or supporting us with a tax-deductible contribution at WVWFoundation.com or through our mailing address.
Please tune in to our next broadcast next week where, again, we're gonna share with you audio and video that many of you have never seen, as we seek to understand the worldview of Martin Luther King Jr., and a real biblical response to the issue of racial harmony. Till next week, I'm Brannon Howse. Thank you for watching. Take care.
