As many followers of my blog have witnessed, since January, I have been covering the topic of Postmodernism as it relates to Freemasonry. Here is a list of the topics I have written about: Postmodernism’s Ruination of Immortal Pursuits; Updated For The Postmodern Thinker: Online Etiquette For Masons; With Supporting Quotes From Albert Pike; Why Are We Encouraged To Explore Divinity Within Freemasonry If The Craft Is Not A Religion? Why Does Freemasonry Conceal Its Secrets From Even Its Own Members? Spiritual Anarchy and Freemasonry; Characteristics of a Postmodern Freemason; and Postmodernism And Its Devastating Effect On Freemasonry.

Now I am going to delve into a touchy subject: yes, politics. Normally, Freemasons are taught to shy away from discussing political issues. And there is a good reason for doing so. You see, in order to achieve the precepts of “Brotherly Love,” it is always better not to discuss such things for fear that it might alienate a Brother and his views. Therefore, I will take care not to offend anyone; but rather, I will discuss this current political movement in an objective manner.

Let me first state that I do not have a horse in the race this political season. You see, I teach history and the social sciences at a college; as such, I feel very comfortable researching and discussing our current political environment objectively, which a pure sociologist and historian is taught to do.

I do this exercise to help the brethren understand what is happening right now in our culture. In short, for the past 50 years or so, Postmodern thinking has influenced the American people, as well as other peoples in the Western world. However, things are certainly changing, and it is this change that has so many people worried.

Let us first explore the vote by Britain to leave the European Union (EU); most commonly referred to as Brexit. So what was this vote all about. There are, of course, countless claims and counter claims about the reasons for Britain’s decision to leave the EU. I take no position on the move itself. I do however find this movement within the realm of rejecting Postmodern thinking. Iskander Rehman perhaps said it best:

It is perhaps inevitable that such divisions should materialize within a union of 28 nations animated by disparate historical experiences, equipped with unequal levels of military resources, and confronted with different geostrategic predicaments. The turmoil engulfing the Old World’s periphery has peeled away at Europe’s residual postmodern illusions, exposing raw divisions and divergent hierarchies of interests.”

In short, Rehman said the decision to leave the EU was the final move in wiping out “residual postmodern illusions.” You see, as I have stated in my earlier commentaries on the topic of Postmodernism, such thinking is itself based on nothing other than the destruction of the old in the hope that something new would be better. Forget history, forget everything we have ever learned about out past; in essence, throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Now let us explore the rejection of Postmodernism closer to home. I have been watching this year’s political movements play themselves out. Just like our last election cycle, where we witnessed Ron Paul come ever so close to winning the Republican nomination, now we witnessed Bernie Sanders come so ever close as well. Both men, however, fell short because the political elites within the respective parties decided to make the decision for the American electorate. In short, the Democratic party actually worked against the interest of the American people in favor the status quo of Postmodernism. But what did Paul and Sanders represent? They represented change, or a rejection of Postmodernism within the political system. Some might even say a return to Modernism, at least to some degree; especially when it came to job creation. Although, to be intellectually honest, we could never truly return to Modernism, only because a portion of Postmodernism will always remain with the American people.

Or how about Donald Trump (Republican) vs. Hillary Clinton (Democrat), what do these candidates represent? Simply stated, Trump represents change, or a rejection of Postmodernism, and Clinton represents maintaining the status quo, or adherence to Postmodernism.

I find it most interesting that every time Trump puts his foot in his mouth or someone attacks his credibility, he surges another 2% in the polls. One has to ask, why is this happening? It’s simple, the American people, like so many people around the globe, don’t trust slick talking politicians who say one thing, yet do the opposite.

Just a short history lesson, the debate between Kennedy and Nixon during the 1960 presidential race illustrates the rise of Postmodernism (Kennedy) and the decline of Modernism (Nixon):

In 1960, John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon squared off in the first televised presidential debates in American history. The Kennedy-Nixon debates not only had a major impact on the election’s outcome, but ushered in a new era in which crafting a public image and taking advantage of media exposure became essential ingredients of a successful political campaign. They also heralded the central role television has continued to play in the democratic process.”

It took taken some fifty years for the people of the world to understand that Postmodern hopism is an illusion; it solved nothing. It was an experiment in social control, and the 1960 debate between Kennedy and Nixon clearly illustrates this change in attitudes, as clearly as the Trump vs. Clinton candidacies do.

How will this end? Only time will tell. The bigger issue, however, is not the election itself; no, the biggest issue is the movement of rejecting Postmodernism and the destruction of such thinking. And this can be seen by Bernie Sander’s supporters who are rejecting any and all calls for party solidarity, despite Sander’s calls for it. In fact, he can’t even stop was has already started, “Sanders was at a loss. Here he was telling his most loyal supporters what needed to happen next in order to unify the party and beat Donald Trump. And they weren’t listening. They wanted revolution. Now, not later.”

I hope this brief essay has helped the reader better understand what is happening in our culture and not just within the Craft itself. Moreover, it is obvious that the people of the world have begun to understand that Postmodernism has been an obstacle to truly understanding Godly endeavors. Only time will tell if this change will have a lasting effect.

So Mote It Be!!!

Hank Kraychir