Jump to content

JW Insider

Surprisingly Accurate Assessment of the June 2020 BLM Protests

Recommended Posts

I haven't done a political post in a while, but it is probably a good idea that I try to explain in what ways I agree with Tucker Carlson (whom I usually disagree with to such a point that I never watch more than about once a month). I will try to avoid religion in this post, although it usually creeps in. This is more of an attempt to explain what I think is going on from a completely socio-economico-political perspective.

I think the recent “Black Lives Matter” protests are an outgrowth of a few specific factors. Conceptually, at least, there are the very real issues of police brutality, racist violence, and the “disparities” people of color often face. 

Materially, however, I think that there are 2 main factors driving the protests. One has been been the very recent social isolation and economic pain caused by America’s COVID19 response. This is too obvious. The other is — and has been for about 40 years now — the increasing proletarianization of the Professional/Managerial Middle Class (PMC). This has been particularly acute since the rapid liberalization and financialization of the economy since the 1980s and especially since the Recession/Depression of 2008. 

Members of the PMC are a relatively privileged class, distinct from the already “precarious” working class. Typically they are university-educated (the ~35% of the population with Bachelor’s Degrees or higher) possessing — or having close family that possess — upper-middle or higher incomes. The PMC is engaged in (or has close family engaged in) professional work involving business, management, finance, computers, engineering, law, medicine, media, education, and other technical fields. They make up about 40% of the recently employed labor force, or about 30% of the total population (typically earning the top 30% of incomes). 

While distinct from the ruling capitalist class (the 1% or less that own and control the bulk of capitalism), and also distinct from the vast working masses, the PMC has attributes of both. As they are typically inculcated in elite institutions, they carry the ruling ideologies: liberalism, individualism, self-help, liberal capitalism (“representational” economics), quasi-religious idealism, cosmopolitanism (“diversity and inclusion”), imperialism, and identitarianism (“identity politics”). 

But, in the era of monopoly capitalism, and thereby of stagnation, war, rising prices, and large-scale crisis, they have also had to face some fraction (however small) of the grim reality the proletarian masses face on a daily basis. Low wages and part-time employment, the absence of unions or collective bargaining, concerns about childcare, and unprecedented levels of debt have all become commonplace. 

This has bred an acute sense of insecurity and entitlement for those directly or even indirectly affected. This has bred hopelessness and political polarization. It also breeds a corresponding anarchist ideology tied to its liberal counterpart: the rejection (to varying degrees) of authority, intellectuals, elections, law, leadership, centralism, control, government, and/or “politics” more generally — in favor of decentralization, reaction, emotional catharsis, fetishization of “protest,” and local “communitarianism.” 

Needless to say, these are not the only people showing up to Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests. But neoliberal antiracists and their anarchist counterparts do form the majority or at least a plurality of what might be termed the “movement.” And they certainly drive the gist of its politics, its “strategy” and tactics, and its social media presence. 

I use quotes around a lot of words here — “disparity,” “representation,” “movement,” “strategy”... This is because I believe these to be flawed categories; PMC distortions of reality often serving the neoliberal ruling class (not necessarily consciously).

It is difficult to see the “strategy” that BLM takes as a whole (though there is great potential in some organizations, which typically devolves over time). There is not really a unified or long-term plan outside of performative acts such as “Say Their Names,” the confessionals of white guilt, firing a few police officers, the rioting, and the media spectacle. Even specific, political goals (e.g., “Abolish the Police”) are often short-sighted and lack regard for future strategy or the larger political-economic context. (And there is evidence of overwhelming rejection to the ideas of defunding police departments among African-Americans in general.)

The same problems were present within BLM in 2014-2016. They should have been critiqued for very similar reasons then, too. Unfortunately, it was and is because the ideology motivating a lot of the participation and organizations is empty, anarchist, or at its core the ruling neoliberal ideology. (And these problems are not new: Bayard Rustin made similar critiques of “Black Power” in 1966.)

The typical framing of “disparity” and “representation” by neoliberal antiracists, for example, serves really to privilege essentialist notions of race and gender and sexual orientation, while often raging against the unequal distribution of social “goods and bads” for these idealized groups (or “identities”). 

That framing — plus many other aspects of the “woke” university jargon and neoliberal ideology — serves a double-function. First, it offends and alienates constituencies which might otherwise unite with the causes of ending police violence and more systemic issues like poverty, which are both sources of great consternation for many white working class people. (This is even to an extent true of the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag itself, though, of course, everyone should acknowledge that black people are “over-represented” in killings by about 2.5 times*, and a whole host of other discriminations and problems too.) 

*No time for sources yet, but I'll add a few later.

Secondly, it also normalizes capitalism and the elite’s power to shape the more general context of jobs, real estate, and government, contributing to the very problems BLM purports to want to solve. Neoliberal antiracists tend to dismiss this charge outright, as they claim to “always mention” the problems of “the system!” But simplistic concession is not enough; theoretical and especially pragmatic questions are critically important to real movement-building, as they have been throughout world history.

In any case, for those wishing to make progress within the confines of this system, they would have to look at the greater context in which police violence occurs. There are some states in the US — and strikingly many of them in the Southern “Black Belt,”** where police killings of poor whites are often roughly equal to police killings of black people, even adjusted to their proportions in the society. Nearly all police killings (95%) occur in areas where the per-capita annual income is less than $50,000 (median income less than $25,000). Some of these areas have more crime. 

** Expanded from Adolph Reed's 2017 data by double-checking with other sources.

These facts alone illustrate the problem with using “disparity” as an analytical lens. It also poses a positive practical question: Could this allow for a bridging of the gap between White and Black America on organizational lines? Is there something to be salvaged from the “All Lives Matter” retort so often dismissed as racist? 

Put differently, would more effective movements be built if they were of the sort that organize around broad working-class constituencies and concrete questions? Building consensus as opposed to assuming pre-existing blocs? And can they move beyond “disruption” and gain power and effect change in the way the most influential Civil Rights leaders like MLK and Bayard Rustin envisioned? (It is a little discussed fact that the most pressure against civil rights leaders on a national scale began when MLK and others expanded their outreach to create broader coalitions.)

The gut-level response of the neoliberal antiracists to this question has so often been a resounding “No!” 

In fact, very often, these ideas are dismissed as somehow “implicitly racist” in themselves; very often they are slandered falsely as “class-reductionist.” Very often analogies to movements of the past are shouted down with “We’ve been there done that!” and sometimes even “Nonviolence is not the answer!” Serious concerns about the short-term consequences of rioting or the long-term evolution of anarchistic tendencies, concerns about supposedly “good” policy outcomes or tactics, are dismissed as “lacking empathy” for the causes or for “genocide” or “existential threats!” 

Not only is none of this the case, I would argue, but these “counterarguments” and insistence on hyperbolic rhetoric are little more than masks for a race-essentialist, identitarian, neoliberal class politics. They are a “class reductionism” of their own! They constitute a politics whose practical consequence is the division and further subdivision of the working masses and the (smaller) middle class. And this politics is neatly aligned with a large section of the ruling class’s agenda and the agenda of their capitalist/imperialist lackeys in the Democratic Party. 

So co-opting (by Democrats, so-called “anti-Trump” politicians, Hong Kong separatists, cops, the rich, etc.) is not only a “risk” movements of this kind face; it is a direct result of the kind of decentralization and class politics it espouses and represents. This is just an inevitable invitation to co-optation! 

It is therefore predictable that almost the entirety of the media apparatus (both corporate news media and manipulated social media), including much of the elites that own and operate them, all show sympathy for or outright endorse these protests. Should this not be looked at with suspicion? 

A significant section of the ruling class elite has for decades wished for diminishing the role of the State in education, services, and policing — precisely in favor of privatization and profit. The ruling class near-unanimously supports both the corruption and the dismantling of labor unions generally, a key factor in the disenfranchisement of people of color and the sharpening of inequality! Like it or not, the AFL-CIO (which has been attacked both rhetorically and now evidently a targeted burning of an AFL-CIO building during riots last week) and police unions (many of whom are people of color) are part of that picture too, issues of entrenchment and racism aside.  

So initial solutions that might be effective would have to see any tactics and organizing within this broader context and have a strategically calculated, long-term vision. Anarchism (in the general sense I defined above) must be rooted out, as it is a pitfall of real organization. Dismantling a specific system like police militarization or mass incarceration is alright so long as there is unity on how to do it, what to replace it with, how to maintain that new order, and how to maintain momentum and accountability to the working class majority.

Unfortunately, I do not yet see these features. Some good may yet come out of it, such as the punishment of officers involved in needless brutality and killing, many reforms at the state or municipal level, and a profound change in the bravery and political consciousness of our nation’s people. (Good only when limitations are understood and change can be effected without violence/suffering for others.) The same was said of the rise of BLM in 2014-2016. But the fear is that this will not result in any drastic change to the status quo nor will it build any strategic momentum. Indeed, many of the BLM leaders from 2014-2016 appear themselves to have been assassinated! I haven't looked far enough into this, but even "reputable" (traditional) national news sources have made this claim about Ferguson, Missouri BLM organizers.

I believe the alternative implied by this critique is somewhat obvious, at least in broad outline. Attempts to effectively solve the most issues would need to start with wide, broader-spectrum, and centralized membership organizations accountable to the working class. They would need to start with a clear set of strategic, attainable policy goals with a vision toward building momentum. Unfortunately, there are deep-rooted oppositional forces and predictable reactions from the ruling class to be watched for, and defended against. So there should never be violence of course, although this is typical of ruling class reactions when cornered. But infiltration and sabotage and false flags are even trickier to watch for. They would need to bridge as many gaps as possible, rejecting essentialisms, rejecting the quasi-religious narratives of “Original Sin,” (not in a religious sense, but the idea of unrequited guilt over slavery, lynchings, civil rights abuses, etc.) rejecting hyperbolic or exclusionary rhetoric, and rejecting the politics of the PMC and the ruling class.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

I have never posted a Twitter video before. (Hope this works)

Nah, you screwed it all up. But behind the scenes, I contacted JTR and he made it right for you. “Is he doing more ‘heavy lifting,‘” he said. “Is he ever!” I replied.

I haven’t seen Tucker and I haven’t yet read your post thoroughly. I will. One thing that I noticed:

50 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

where police killings of poor whites are often roughly equal to police killings of black people, even adjusted to their proportions in the society.

I spoke to a retired military man in field service who told me how he had felt a great sense of responsibility for those under his command. For some reason, in these racially charged days, you always have to say if someone was white or black. He was black. He spoke to how in police recruiting today a military background was a large factor—sometimes the only factor—that was taken under consideration for hire. This was true even of those who had had serious discipline problems. “You don’t think that if they are discipline problems in the military, they might not be ideal for civilian policing?” he said.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/9/2020 at 6:54 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

He spoke to how in police recruiting today a military background was a large factor—sometimes the only factor—that was taken under consideration for hire.

And it's amazing how much heavy military equipment is being sold even to small towns over the last decade especially. I guess it makes the [recent military] recruits feel more comfortable? I suspect it also puts them in mind of how they needed to respond with heavy lethal force just a few months prior in some cases [in other countries]. Easy to imagine a new interview question when hiring police recruits: Can you fire a tank?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of people are surprised at the global spread of the protests and rioting. What might be even more surprising is the support by many media outlets, not just of the protests, but also supporting the rioting and destruction. MLK is quoted where he said that 'riots are the language of the oppressed.' (Which cherry-picks the quote out of MLK's context that did NOT support rioting.) It's also odd that all this happens in the midst of Covid19, which has disproportionately killed more African-Americans than police have for the last 100 years. Yet, there is no protest about the languishing response to that particular part of the Covid19 problem.

Another odd thing to notice about BLM is that one of their major contributors is from a CIA-backed organization. For those who might think this is just a conspiracy, the Ford Foundation has already admitted to giving more than $100,000. The CIA.org website reviews a book called "The Cultural Cold War" sometimes critiquing and sometimes accepting the author's claims:

She also does a fine job in recounting the intriguing story of how the CIA worked with existing institutions, such as the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation, and established numerous "bogus" foundations to "hide" its funding of the Congress for Cultural Freedom and its other covert activities.  

In truth, the Ford Foundation has a long history with the CIA, especially post-WW2 through today. The New Yorker admits a connection, of sorts:

The Ford Foundation . . . The left thought that it was propping up the status quo, and was probably a front for the C.I.A. to boot (and, in fact, the C.I.A. was using other foundations for covert funding).

Books, websites, (in some cases even those written by persons involved with the Ford Foundation) admit to the intended effect of hiring CIA recruits and supporting CIA projects. Summaries of some of these activities are easily found, and not even denied:

Ford Foundation, a philanthropic facade for the CIA

by Paul Labarique

Between 1947 and 1966 the Ford Foundation played a key role in the network of US interference in Europe through the subvention of magazines, scientific programs and non-communist left-wing organizations. The largest philanthropic organization in the world was in fact providing a respectful facade for CIA financial and contact operations. This role was even more possible by the fact that the same persons designed and directed both organizations.

Also here:

James Petras, retired Bartle Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University in Binghamton, New York, and adjunct professor at Saint Mary’s University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, wrote a damning article on September 18, 2002, exposing the Ford Foundation’s sinister choice of beneficiaries of its donations. He accused the CIA of using “philanthropic foundations as the most effective conduit to channel large sums of money to Agency projects without alerting the recipients to their source”.

A quick search on Google shows that even the Washington Post has made the connection as recently as 2018:


The CIA funded a culture war against communism. It should do so again.

Magazines like Der Monat and English-American literary-political journal Encounter were not the only activities supported by nonprofit pass-throughs such as the Farfield Foundation and the Ford Foundation. The CIA-backed Congress for Cultural Freedom brought the Boston Symphony to Europe (at the cost of $166,359.84 . . .

It can be just as hard to guess what the CIA's thinking is about BLM. But, based on past uses and abuses of philanthropic organizations, the surreal response should be looked at with some suspicion.

Oh wait, did I promise I wouldn't say things like:  "but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one"? Or,  "They are, in fact, expressions inspired by demons and they perform signs, and they go out to the kings of the entire inhabited earth, to gather them together to the war of the great day . . ."

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2020 at 10:41 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

The quote is not mine, but I wish it were:

Future historians will be asked what quarter of 2020 did they specialize in.

For me though I kind of knew it was about to go down in 2020. These groups on the far-left and right were going nuts since 2017 and as the months and years go by, tie tension increases, the civil war talks return and a list of other things.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

  • Topics

  • Members

    • Engineer

      Engineer 0

      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

    • folens  »  Eric Ouellet

      Bonjour Eric, merci pour cet exposé sur Hanna, Bonne journée. Michel
      · 1 reply
    • Eric Ouellet

      UNE femme de foi adresse une prière à Jéhovah. Convaincue que c’est Dieu qui l’a relevée de la poussière, transformant son abattement en exultation, elle le loue à haute voix.
      Cette femme, c’est Hanna. Qu’est-ce qui explique son spectaculaire changement d’état d’âme ? Pourquoi est-elle à présent si joyeuse ? En quoi ce qu’elle a vécu peut-il nous être utile ? Intéressons-nous à son histoire.
      Une famille sous pression
      Hanna est l’une des deux femmes d’Elqana, un Lévite de la région d’Éphraïm (1 Samuel 1:1, 2a ; 1 Chroniques 6:33, 34). Bien que n’entrant pas dans le dessein originel de Dieu pour l’humanité, la polygamie est autorisée et réglementée sous la Loi mosaïque. Elle est néanmoins une source fréquente de discorde. La vie de cette famille, qui pourtant adore Jéhovah, en témoigne.
      Hanna est stérile, tandis que Peninna, l’autre femme d’Elqana, a plusieurs enfants. Peninna se comporte en rivale. — 1 Samuel 1:2b.
      Pour une Israélite, la stérilité est un déshonneur, et même un signe de la défaveur divine. Mais, dans le cas de Hanna, rien n’indique que son incapacité de procréer soit liée à la désapprobation de Dieu. Peninna ne la console pas pour autant ; elle se prévaut au contraire de son statut de mère pour l’humilier.
      Au sanctuaire de Jéhovah
      Malgré ces tensions, la famille entreprend le voyage annuel en direction du sanctuaire de Jéhovah, à Shilo, pour y offrir des sacrifices. L’aller-retour de quelque 60 kilomètres se fait vraisemblablement à pied. Cet événement doit être particulièrement pénible pour Hanna. En effet, Peninna et ses enfants reçoivent plusieurs portions du sacrifice de communion, alors que Hanna, elle, n’en reçoit qu’une seule. Peninna trouve là une opportunité supplémentaire de la blesser et de la mettre dans l’embarras ; il semble que Jéhovah ait “ fermé sa matrice ”, et elle ne manque pas de le lui rappeler. Tous les ans, c’est le même calvaire. Tous les ans, Hanna pleure et cesse de manger. Ces voyages qui normalement devraient la mettre en joie la plongent dans une profonde détresse. Hanna se rend néanmoins chaque année au sanctuaire de Jéhovah. — 1 Samuel 1:3-7.
      Voyez-vous en quoi Hanna est un bel exemple ? Comment réagissez-vous lorsque vous êtes déprimé ? Vous isolez-vous et évitez-vous les contacts avec vos compagnons chrétiens ? Ce n’est pas ce qu’a fait Hanna. Les rassemblements avec les adorateurs de Jéhovah étaient pour elle une habitude de vie. Même face à des circonstances éprouvantes, il devrait en être de même pour nous. — Psaume 26:12 ; 122:1 ; Proverbes 18:1 ; Hébreux 10:24, 25.
      Elqana tente de réconforter Hanna et il l’amène à exprimer ses sentiments profonds. “ Hanna, pourquoi pleures-tu et pourquoi ne manges-tu pas ? Pourquoi ton cœur a-t-il mal ? lui demande-t-il. Est-ce que je ne vaux pas mieux pour toi que dix fils ? ” (1 Samuel 1:8). Peut-être n’a-t-il pas conscience de la malveillance de Peninna. Et peut-être Hanna préfère-t-elle se taire plutôt que de se plaindre. Quoi qu’il en soit, cette femme spirituelle se tourne vers Jéhovah dans la prière pour retrouver la paix intérieure.
      Le vœu de Hanna
      Les sacrifices de communion étaient consommés dans le sanctuaire. Après avoir quitté la salle à manger, Hanna prie Dieu (1 Samuel 1:9, 10). “ Ô Jéhovah des armées, implore-t-elle, si tu ne manques pas de regarder l’affliction de ton esclave et si vraiment tu te souviens de moi, si tu n’oublies pas ton esclave et si vraiment tu donnes à ton esclave un descendant mâle, oui je le donnerai à Jéhovah pour tous les jours de sa vie, et le rasoir ne viendra pas sur sa tête. ” — 1 Samuel 1:11.
      La prière de Hanna est précise. Elle demande un fils, et elle fait le vœu que cet enfant sera toute sa vie un naziréen de Dieu (Nombres 6:1-5). Ce vœu nécessite l’approbation de son mari, et certaines actions ultérieures d’Elqana montrent qu’il approuve l’engagement pris par sa chère femme. — Nombres 30:6-8.
      À cause de la manière dont Hanna prie, le grand prêtre Éli la croit ivre. Il voit effectivement ses lèvres frémir, mais il ne l’entend pas parler. C’est qu’en fait Hanna prie dans son cœur, avec ferveur (1 Samuel 1:12-14). Imaginez ce qu’elle ressent lorsque le grand prêtre l’accuse d’être ivre ! Pourtant, elle lui répond respectueusement. Comprenant alors que Hanna était en train de prier “ dans l’abondance de [son] inquiétude et de [son] dépit ”, il lui dit : “ Que le Dieu d’Israël accorde ta requête. ” (1 Samuel 1:15-17). Sur ces paroles, Hanna s’en va ; elle mange et “ son visage ne par[aît] plus soucieux ”. — 1 Samuel 1:18.
      Que nous enseigne tout cela ? Lorsque nous prions Jéhovah à propos de nos inquiétudes, nous pouvons lui exprimer ce que nous ressentons et lui adresser des requêtes sincères. Si nous avons fait tout notre possible pour résoudre le problème, alors nous devrions laisser les choses entre ses mains. C’est ce qu’il y a de mieux à faire. — Proverbes 3:5, 6.
      Après une prière fervente, il est fréquent que des serviteurs de Jéhovah ressentent une sérénité comparable à celle que Hanna a éprouvée. Voici ce qu’a écrit l’apôtre Paul au sujet de la prière : “ Ne vous inquiétez de rien, mais en tout, par la prière et la supplication avec action de grâces, faites connaître vos requêtes à Dieu ; et la paix de Dieu, qui surpasse toute pensée, gardera vos cœurs et vos facultés mentales par le moyen de Christ Jésus. ” (Philippiens 4:6, 7). Après nous être déchargés de notre fardeau sur Jéhovah, nous devons le laisser s’en occuper. Puis, comme dans le cas de Hanna, il n’y a plus lieu de s’inquiéter. — Psaume 55:22.
      Un fils “ prêté ” à Jéhovah
      Dieu se tourne alors vers Hanna. Peu après, elle porte un enfant. Elle met au monde un garçon (1 Samuel 1:19, 20). C’est l’une des rares fois où la Bible fait état de la responsabilité de Dieu dans la naissance de l’un de ses serviteurs. L’enfant d’Elqana et de Hanna, Samuel, deviendra effectivement le prophète de Jéhovah, un prophète qui jouera un rôle important dans la mise en place de la monarchie d’Israël.
      Il est certain que Hanna parle de Jéhovah à Samuel dès sa petite enfance. Mais oublie-t-elle le vœu qu’elle a fait ? Absolument pas ! “ Dès que le garçon sera sevré, je devrai l’amener ; il devra paraître devant Jéhovah et habiter là pour des temps indéfinis ”, déclare-t-elle. Et en effet, une fois l’enfant sevré — peut-être à l’âge de trois ans ou un peu plus —, elle l’amène au sanctuaire, comme elle l’avait promis. — 1 Samuel 1:21-24 ; 2 Chroniques 31:16.
      Après avoir offert un sacrifice à Jéhovah, Hanna et son mari présentent Samuel à Éli. Hanna tient certainement la main de son petit garçon lorsqu’elle dit à Éli : “ Pardon, mon seigneur ! Par la vie de ton âme, mon seigneur, je suis la femme qui se tenait près de toi, en ce lieu, pour prier Jéhovah. C’est à propos de ce garçon que je priais, pour que Jéhovah m’accorde ma requête, ce que je lui demandais. Et moi, à mon tour, je l’ai prêté à Jéhovah. Oui, tous les jours qu’il sera, c’est quelqu’un de demandé pour Jéhovah. ” Ainsi commence, pour Samuel, une vie au service de Dieu. — 1 Samuel 1:25-28 ; 2:11.
      Le temps passe ; bien sûr Hanna n’oublie pas son fils. Les Écritures relatent : “ Sa mère avait coutume de lui faire un petit manteau sans manches, et elle le lui montait, d’année en année, quand elle montait avec son mari pour sacrifier le sacrifice annuel. ” (1 Samuel 2:19). Hanna prie sans aucun doute pour Samuel. Tous les ans, lorsqu’elle lui rend visite, elle l’encourage à coup sûr à demeurer fidèle dans son service pour Dieu.
      Pendant l’une de ces visites, Éli bénit les parents du garçon. Il déclare à Elqana : “ Que Jéhovah t’assigne une descendance de cette femme, à la place du prêt qui a été prêté à Jéhovah. ” C’est ainsi que le couple est récompensé par la naissance de trois autres fils et de deux filles. — 1 Samuel 2:20, 21.
      Quel formidable exemple pour les parents chrétiens ! Beaucoup de mères et de pères se montrent, eux aussi, disposés à prêter, figurément parlant, leurs enfants à Jéhovah ; en effet, ils les encouragent à entreprendre une forme de service à plein temps, même si cela implique que leur fils, ou leur fille, vive loin d’eux. De tels parents aimants méritent des louanges pour les sacrifices qu’ils font. Jéhovah les récompensera.
      Une prière qui déborde de joie
      Comme Hanna est heureuse, elle que la stérilité affectait tant autrefois ! Les Écritures ne contiennent que peu de prières faites par des femmes. Mais, en ce qui concerne Hanna, elles en rapportent deux. La première expose ses sentiments alors qu’elle est humiliée et affligée. La seconde exprime son exultation et son action de grâces ; elle commence par ces mots : “ Oui, mon cœur exulte en Jéhovah. ” Hanna se réjouit ensuite que ‘ même la stérile ait mis au monde ’. Et elle loue Jéhovah, celui “ qui élève [...], qui relève le petit de la poussière ”. Vraiment, il est celui qui “ de la fosse aux cendres [...] fait remonter le pauvre ”. — 1 Samuel 2:1-10.
      Cet épisode de la vie de Hanna, dont le récit a été inspiré par Dieu, montre que les imperfections, voire la malveillance, des autres peuvent nous blesser. Toutefois, nous ne devons pas permettre à ce genre d’épreuves de nous priver de notre joie de servir Dieu. Jéhovah est, par excellence, Celui qui entend la prière, qui répond aux appels à l’aide de ses fidèles et qui les délivre de l’affliction. Il leur accorde une paix profonde et de nombreuses autres bénédictions. — Psaume 22:23-26 ; 34:6-8 ; 65:2.

      · 0 replies
    • Eric Ouellet

      1 Samuel 2 : 1-10
      Hannah pria Dieu en ces mots:
      Mon cœur se réjouit au sujet de Jéhovah
      ma force grandit grâce à Jéhovah.
      Ma bouche s’ouvre toute grande contre mes ennemis,
      car je me réjouis de tes actes sauveurs.
      Il n’y a personne qui soit saint comme Jéhovah,
      il n’y a personne qui soit comme toi,
      il n’y a pas de rocher comme notre Dieu.
      Arrêtez de parler avec orgueil ;
      que rien d’arrogant ne sorte de votre bouche,
      car Jéhovah est un Dieu qui sait tout
      et il juge les actions avec justice.
      Les arcs des hommes forts sont brisés,
      mais les hommes faibles reçoivent de la force
      Ceux qui mangeaient bien doivent trouver du travail pour avoir du pain,
      mais les affamés ne souffrent plus de la faim.
      La femme stérile a donné naissance à sept fils,
      mais celle qui avait beaucoup de fils est devenue stérile.
      Jéhovah tue et il garde en vie,
      il fait descendre dans la Tombe et il en fait remonter.
      Jéhovah fait devenir pauvre et il fait devenir riche,
      il abaisse et il élève.
      Il relève le petit de la poussière
      et fait remonter le pauvre du tas de cendres
      pour les faire asseoir avec les princes
      et leur offrir une place d’honneur.
      À Jéhovah appartiennent les fondations de la terre ;
      sur elles, il pose le monde
      Il veille sur les pas de ses fidèles,
      mais les méchants seront tués dans l’obscurité,
      car ce n’est pas par la force que l’homme triomphe. 
      Jéhovah anéantira ceux qui combattent contre lui ;
      pour exprimer sa colère, il fera gronder le tonnerre dans le ciel.
      Jéhovah jugera jusqu’aux extrémités de la terre,
      il donnera du pouvoir à son roi et il fera grandir la force de son oint.

      · 1 reply
    • anniemsbelle@gmail.com  »  Queen Esther

      Do you have the print out for the regional convention 
      · 1 reply
    • anniemsbelle@gmail.com  »  Queen Esther

      Do you have the print out for the regional convention 
      · 0 replies
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
    • Most Online

    Newest Member
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.