Gone are the days of university freshmen reading classical philosophers like Plato or contemporary pedagogues like Ta-Nehisi Coates. These days, incoming college students are lucky if they can get through Judy Blume’s “Tales of a Fourth Grade Nothing.”

According to a new “Survey of Adult Skills” conducted by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development — a forum for 38 high-income, predominantly Western countries — a not insignificant number of adult students enrolled in higher education are now reading and doing math at a level which, in a more functional society, would be alarming for a middle schooler.

The survey, first spotted by the Economist, tested around 160,000 people of all ages, across all 38 member states. It found that across all OECD member countries, a full 8 percent of college students are reading at the level of a ten-year-old, if not worse. While countries like Germany and France rang in at under 5 percent, countries like Poland, Israel, and the United States blew the curve at 21, 20, and 14 percent, respectively.

The numbers aren’t much better when it comes to math. Across OECD countries, 9 percent of college students do math at or below a ten-year-old level. In Italy, the US, and Slovakia, that figure jumps to over 15 percent — only outdone by Israel, where roughly 21 percent of college students were underachieving at the same low benchmark.

It seems there are numerous compounding explanations for these test results: pandemic-era learning gaps leading to lower levels of preparation, declining college enrollment forcing schools to lower admissions standards, and lower levels of public funding for education, to name a few.

The results also coincide with the explosion of large language models like ChatGPT, which by many accounts have carved out a new floor for academic failure in both K-12 and college-level education.

While there’s no denying how complicated the issue is, there is evidence that removing technology from classrooms altogether could offer an immediate boost.

In one classroom in Minneapolis, for example, a literature and English teacher banned phones and laptops, requiring all coursework to be done on pencil and paper. As the school-year started in September, just 46 percent of the students involved said they felt confident about their reading skills. A few months later in February, that number stood at 95 percent.

Though it’s just one classroom, something is clearly off the rails in the education systems of the richest countries of the world — and the longer it goes unaddressed, the more students will be pushed into the world with the reading skills of 4th graders.

Joe Wilkins, Futurism

From Dr. Jordan B. Peterson

To the Americans:

I’ve travelled all over the world. I’ve familiarized myself with many places, and met many people. And I’m a Canadian, although I’m privileged to reside once again in the States.

And here’s something I’ve noticed, and it’s a key element of America’s continuing greatness:

You bloody Americans value success, and you believe in its existence.

This is something that doesn’t really happen anywhere else in the world. Even in other free democracies—the United Kingdom; Finland, Sweden, and Norway; Australia, New Zealand and Canada; Germany, France, and the Netherlands (great countries all)—a counterproductive cynicism too often reigns.

Success is equated with exploitation.
Ambition is looked upon with contempt.

This happens sometimes in the United States too—particularly among the miserable progressives, who confuse their resentment, ingratitude and unearned skepticism with wisdom.

But in your great country, by and large, striving is admired and success celebrated.

This means that more people strive and succeed in the US than anywhere else. And it’s increasingly obvious. You remain stunningly more innovative and productive than any people anywhere else on the planet.

And so I say, as all should who are fortunate enough to live in the western world, let alone America:

Thank God for the United States.
Thank God for the wisdom of its founders.
Thank God for its faith in the free market and in the natural rights of man.

Happy birthday, you damn Yankees and Southerners.

Long may your admirable country dominate the world.

Long may your freedom and hope provide an example to those suffering everywhere at the hands of their malevolent states.

May your two and a half centuries of unparalleled success be just the beginning.

Your country is the light of the world, and the city on the hill.

Thank God for the USA.

Happy 250th.

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson

To the Founders: It hasn’t been easy. We’ve made mistakes in the past two and a half centuries. But a lot of us still regard with precious sentiment that you pledged your lives, your fortunes, and your sacred honor.

I have tried to uphold the duties imparted unto me as a citizen of this land. In reflecting upon the occasion, I am impressed with the conviction that my efforts have been found lacking. Very, very few of us, it must be said, have dedicated ourselves to uphold the responsibilities that come with the qualities that you announced for all time were of full rights to be bestowed upon every man and woman.

So it is that on this occasion, the two hundredth and fiftieth anniversary of the founding of our nation, that I resolve to devote however many years are within my lifetime to serving my native land with all the strength, and wisdom, and temerity that are mine to command.

I challenge every citizen of these United States to do likewise.

We are not yet the perfect Union. But we have come to be a more perfect Union. This is a process, lumps and all. And for all of the sins of the Founders that have become fashionable to condemn, it must be stated with all due confidence that those men, the greatest of their generation, gave us the means to draw closer to the ideals of freedom. America is and always has been a work in progress. We lift up what works and we take down what doesn’t. It’s gotten us this far, despite our faults and foibles. Maybe it can get us a little further.

I think a lot of harm has been done to our republic over the years. Especially in the past century. Too many of us have come to see this country as something to exploit and take from without having to contribute to it. Many people have done things that in a sane world would be deemed outright treasonous. Those will be dealt with in due time. Nobody ever got away with it forever, and so it will be with our republic.

But for all of that, America is still that shining city upon the hill. It is a sacred trust for her citizens, and an inspiration for those in distant lands who may not yet fully know freedom. It is still something that we can be thankful that we are a part of.

So I’m committing to be a better citizen of this great land. It’s what an Eagle Scout, no matter his age, should do. And I call upon ever other American who is reading these words to do that also.

Christopher Knight

Story by Kasra Aarabi, Saeid Golkar

Jul 03 • 4 min read • Updated 1d ago

The Iranian regime’s oligarchic clans are at war with each other – and this conflict may soon spiral beyond control.

This fight is not over ideology or the future direction of the Islamic Republic: all the oligarchic clans are Islamist; some wear turbans, others wear military uniforms, and some wear suits.

In other words, they all subscribe to the core tenets of Shia Islamism in Iran: the forceful imposition of Sharia law domestically, support for the so-called Axis of Resistance militia network, anti-Americanism, and the goal of eradicating the Israel (driven by innate anti-Semitism).

But they are competing to protect and advance their power and economic interests amid the vacuum that emerged after the elimination of Ali Khamenei, the former supreme leader, who had operated as the godfather of these clans.

The latest manifestation of this infighting has erupted in the most unlikely of places: the Assembly of Experts – a body of 88 clerics who, in theory, appoint and oversee the authority of the supreme leader.

Last week, 73 members of the normally silent assembly made an unusual public intervention in the form of a statement on the ongoing negotiations with the United States and the recently-signed Memorandum of Understanding

The statement de facto criticised Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) over its conduct of the negotiations with Washington, suggesting the officials had moved beyond the “red lines” of the supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei.

It said in Farsi: “All officials should respect that, in the system of Velayat-e Faqih (Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist), the opinion and directives of the Supreme Leader are decisive. Once informed of the Leader’s definitive view, no official may act contrary to it.”

After its publication, Ayatollah Hashem Hosseini Busheri, chairman of the Assembly of Experts’ secretariat and spokesperson, immediately stated that he was completely unaware of the statement and that, while he did not oppose its content, its signatories had broken convention and published it without coordination with him.

Remarkably, however, senior members of the secretariat – including Ayatollah Movahedi Kermani, Ayatollah Arafi, Ayatollah Araki and Ayatollah Rajavi – were amongst the signatories of the statement. In fact, only three members of the secretariat had not signed the statement, including Hosseini Busheri.

The very fact that such elite infighting is now unfolding openly within the regime’s most important clerical body is particularly telling.

The Assembly of Experts is effectively representative of the regime’s clerical class. First and foremost, it shields and advances the interests of the clergy, which have long been guaranteed by the supremacy of the position of the supreme leader.

When Ali Khamenei was alive, this power was beyond dispute. But the same cannot be said of Mojtaba, his son and successor, in charge.

Not only is it clear that the new supreme leader no longer holds the same authority as his father, but Mojtaba’s complete public absence has only deepened the power vacuum that has emerged after his predecessor’s death.

This has heightened the anxiety of the Assembly of Experts, which fears its political and economic interests would be at risk should the supreme leader’s position be undermined.

Their statement therefore reveals not only in-fighting between the different oligarch clans of the Islamist regime, but also that the clerical class is scrambling to preserve its political and economic privileges in the face of an increasingly uncertain succession.

For now, these divisions over power and money have been managed and contained in the name of Mojtaba.

His name still serves as a form of political glue. Even in his absence, different factions can invoke his authority to discipline rivals, justify decisions, and avoid a more open confrontation over the regime’s leadership.

But this arrangement is fragile because authority that is not visibly embodied cannot hold for long, particularly in a regime where the leader’s personal presence has historically been central to elite management.

HomeBuddy·Sponsored

Cost to Cover 150 feet of Gutter

If Mojtaba fails to appear at his father’s funeral, it will dramatically intensify speculation about his physical condition and could accelerate factional efforts to prepare for a second succession crisis.

Such a moment would not merely raise questions about one man’s fate.

It could expose the deeper structural crisis facing the Islamic Republic: that a regime built around the absolute authority of one man may no longer have a leader capable of imposing order on the very factions that depend on his authority for their own survival.

The Assembly of Experts’ intervention is therefore more than an isolated episode; it is a sign that the Islamic Republic’s internal balance of power is shifting.

The clerical class, the IRGC-linked networks, the security bureaucracy, and political-economic factions are all manoeuvring to protect their interests in a system whose central source of authority has been weakened.

While these rivalries may remain contained in the short term, the post-Ali Khamenei order is increasingly vulnerable to open elite conflict.

What appears today as a dispute over negotiations may soon become a broader struggle over who truly rules the Islamic Republic.

Kasra Aarabi is director of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) research at United Against Nuclear Iran

Saeid Golkar is senior adviser at United Against Nuclear Iran and UC Foundation Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga

There’s nothing like a heatwave to shine a light on the medieval lunacy of eco-alarmism. The minute the thermometer spikes, all the bourgeois doomsayers are on their soapboxes haranguing humankind. This is ‘hell on Earth’, they cry. It’s ‘global boiling’, they wail. A ‘hound from hell’ is dragging the heat of the ‘Underworld’ into our world, say media scribes, like absolute nutters, blissfully unaware of what faux-priestly, pre-modern fools they sound to the rest of us.

And of course – you already know this – it’s all our fault. We brought this hell upon ourselves by flying and driving and existing. We are reaping the scorched harvest of our own sinful endeavours. As the UN’s climate chief says, it’s our ‘addiction to burning coal, oil and gas’ that is making the crimson sun blare so brightly and causing ‘climate change [to] run rampant’. Your modern living is ‘boiling the planet’ and ‘wrecking our world’, nagged a Guardian writer this week. Repent! Sweat!

Is anyone else tiring of this? Has anyone else had a gutful of the fact that we can’t even enjoy a hot day without being accused of planetary genocide by posh twats in haircloths? Is anyone else sick of those weather maps where the hot countries are Merlot coloured to drive home the crank idea that Cerberus himself has risen from the abyss to put his fiery ass-crack on our planet? I’m not even a fan of heatwaves – being Irish – yet I cannot abide this weaponisation of weather to bully the public.

It’s going to get worse – the heat and the hectoring. Another heatwave is coming. London might even reach 29C, cries the BBC, alongside a blood-red map of our scorched capital. Am I allowed to say that Londoners frequently fly overseas to lounge around in weather hotter than that, or will I be accused of ‘heat-stress denial’? That’s the latest species of ‘denialism’, according to mad old George Monbiot, who says the ‘billionaire press’ has ‘hit rock bottom’ with its denial of the ‘impacts of the heatwave’. We could strap them to the stake for their blasphemous speech, but apparently we’re all on the stake now – we’ve ‘[set] fire to the planet’, says Monbiot. Witches burn themselves these days.

No one is ‘denying’ the impact of the heatwave, of course. Certainly not me. I had to flee a London bus last week. It was a sweatbox on wheels, a rolling tomb of flushed bodies. If only we had air conditioning. But green hysterics, including Monbiot’s own paper, have been wringing their untoiled hands over AC for years. ‘It’s destroying the planet’, said the Guardian during last year’s heatwave. It’s ‘philosophically problematic’, apparently. Nothing – and I mean nothing – better captures the supercilious indifference of our eco-overlords than this vision of a well-fed Guardianista telling the sun-baked masses that it’s ‘philosophically problematic’ to cool your home in a heatwave.

It’s the cruelty of the heatwave hysterics that most startles. For years the climate-change cult has warned us that Earth will shortly be consumed by a hellfire of Man’s own making. Yet anyone who said ‘Let’s get air-con, then’ was damned as a devilish contributor to these End Times fires. The Wall St Journal asked an apt question this week: ‘Europe is hot as hell – why doesn’t it want air-conditioning?’ It reported on the hospitals of our Old World where the ill and elderly are ‘forced to endure… heatwaves’ because their well-fanned rulers have decreed that air-con is an ‘energy-hungry technology’ that undermines ‘the fight against climate change’. The fantasy cause of ‘saving the planet’ takes precedence over the earthly cause of saving the sick from heat.

Air-con is ‘not the solution’, says Time. I don’t know, it’s the solution to my sweating. More importantly, it’s the solution to the sweltering discomfort of elderly folk forced to live in heat-trapping homes and poorly people crammed on to roasting wards because society now fears a fictional apocalypse more than disease. There will be excess deaths this summer, and that’s awful. But it’s far more the fault of the eco-preaching classes than it is of the polluting masses. A hill I’ll die on: the climate-change ideology is a worse killer than climate change itself. I mean, it isn’t Mother Nature going into people’s homes and ripping out the air-con.

This is the story of our times: the elite panic about modernity is far deadlier than modernity. The truth, as Bjorn Lomborg says, is that deaths from climate-related disasters have plummeted in the era of industry. In the 1920s, half-a-million souls perished each year in storms, floods, droughts and heatwaves. In 2020, it was just 14,000. Global annual deaths from climate madness fell by 96 per cent. It is those who libel modernity as a uniquely murderous phenomenon who are signing the death warrant of humankind, for they seek to roll back the very developments that have insulated us from the violent whims of nature. Which includes air-con. To agitate against AC even in a heatwave is to exhibit a staggering misanthropic disregard for one’s fellow humans, especially the vulnerable ones.

And yet still they come, the heatwave hysterics, demonising the very tech that defends us from the heat and wind and water of amoral Nature. ‘[It] seems like End Times – and it’s our own damned fault’, said a green-leaning writer of recent heatwaves. The 2023 heatwave was christened Cerberus, after the hound from hell who rips sinners apart. How fitting. ‘Cerberus’s inferno’, newspapers cried. Even Greta Thunberg, the most celebrated hysteric of our age, has taken a break from berating the Jewish State to say, basically, ‘Fuck, it’s hot’. I guess that’s one upside of the hot weather – it will drag the attention of the idle pricks of the activist class away from the Jews and back to the ‘climate emergency’. Breathe easy, Israel – they’re wanging on about weather, again.

I’m sick of all this luxury apocalypticism. Its medieval strain is undeniable now. Just like our forebears, these fruitcakes see all weather – rain, storm, heat, hail – as a punishment from God / Gaia for our wicked ways. Though at least our ancestors had the excuse of being uneducated. Nature isn’t punishing us. We’re punishing ourselves. The greatest threat to humanity is not the weather but an elite that feverishly seeks to appease the gods of weather by winding back modernity. They’re the reason you’re baking. Rage against them, not the eye of heaven.

Brendan O’Neill

President Donald Trump’s plan to reopen the Strait of Hormuz appears to be working, as transits show the strongest signs yet of returning to normal operations.

Commercial shipping is steadily increasing under the 60-day U.S.-Iran ceasefire, easing fears of prolonged global oil supply disruptions and driving crude prices lower.

New maritime data shows vessel traffic through the strategic waterway has more than quadrupled over the past week as shipping companies cautiously resume voyages through the Persian Gulf.

According to maritime intelligence platform Signal, the number of traceable daily voyages entering and leaving the Gulf increased from just one or two ships during most of the conflict to eight vessels by July 1, based on a seven-day moving average.

But the number of ships moving through with their transponders off is believed to be considerably higher. One study estimated that as many as 40 ships a day transited the strait over the past week.

While still well below prewar traffic levels, the rebound marks a significant improvement in confidence among commercial operators.

Before the conflict erupted, approximately 135 vessels transited the Strait of Hormuz each day, carrying roughly one-fifth of the world’s traded oil and liquefied natural gas.

The increase in shipping is already having a measurable impact on global energy markets.

Brent crude oil has fallen back to roughly its prewar levels for the first time since fighting began, as traders increasingly believe the worst-case supply disruptions may have been avoided.

The decline reflects growing confidence that Gulf producers — including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, and Kuwait — will once again be able to move oil to international markets with fewer interruptions.

Several major shipping companies confirmed the improvement.

German container giant Hapag-Lloyd said four vessels previously stranded inside the Gulf have now exited safely, while Danish shipping leader Maersk reported two of its ships successfully transited the Strait during the past week.

Much of the recent traffic has consisted of oil tankers.

According to Lloyd’s List Intelligence, total vessel movements — including so-called “dark voyages,” in which ships disable GPS tracking to reduce the risk of being targeted — rose to 258 transits during the week ending June 28.

That compares with just 41 voyages during the opening week of the crisis in March.

Many outbound tankers are carrying crude that had been loaded before the war and stored offshore while operators waited for safer conditions.

Iran has also accelerated exports.

Iranian chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said Tehran has exported approximately 40 million barrels of oil since the U.S. lifted its naval blockade, claiming the country has been able to sell its crude at prices roughly 20% above prewar levels.

More than 60 of the recent tanker voyages have reportedly involved Iranian oil exports, taking advantage of temporary sanctions relief granted under the ceasefire agreement.

Exports from neighboring Gulf producers are also recovering.

Several Abu Dhabi National Oil Co. (ADNOC) tankers successfully transited the Strait this week using a southern shipping corridor that hugs Oman’s coastline under air-defense protection reportedly provided by U.S. and Omani forces.

Despite the improving outlook, significant dangers remain.

The International Maritime Organization estimates Iran laid approximately 80 naval mines in the Strait during the conflict. Those mines have yet to be cleared, preventing the two principal international shipping lanes from fully reopening.

Instead, commercial vessels are relying on alternative routes.

Some ships are using a route designated by Iran that requires approval from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, while others are sailing closer to Oman’s territorial waters under enhanced security.

Industry officials caution that today’s increased traffic reflects not only improving security but also economic necessity.

“It’s really difficult to say whether it’s growing confidence or whether it’s risk takers,” Jakob Larsen, chief safety and security officer at the global shipowners’ association BIMCO, told the Financial Times. “At some point shipowners are willing to take that extra risk to get their ship out.”

The improving security picture is also reducing transportation costs.

Spot charter rates for very large crude carriers on the Hormuz route, which surged to nearly $500,000 per day on June 23 amid peak uncertainty, have since fallen to approximately $294,000 per day as more vessels become available and operators regain confidence.

Marine insurance costs have also declined dramatically.

According to insurance broker WTW, war-risk premiums have fallen to roughly 2% of a vessel’s value, down from about 7% immediately after the ceasefire took effect, significantly lowering the cost of transporting oil through the Gulf.

For energy markets, the reopening of the Strait represents a major psychological shift.

Just weeks ago, investors feared a prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz could choke off nearly 20% of global oil supplies, potentially sending crude prices well above $100 per barrel and reigniting inflation worldwide.

Instead, increasing tanker traffic, recovering Gulf exports, declining shipping costs, and lower insurance premiums are restoring confidence that one of the world’s most important energy corridors is gradually returning to business.

© 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Coming to [Christ] as to a living stone” (1 Pet. 2:4).

Jesus is the only source of eternal life and the foundation upon which the church is built.

Peter’s description of Christ as “a living stone” is paradoxical because stones aren’t alive. In fact, we sometimes speak of something being “stone dead.” Yet Peter’s symbolism is profound because it beautifully incorporates three realities about Christ.

First, Jesus is the long-awaited Jewish Messiah. The Old Testament referred to the Messiah as a stone, and Peter incorporated those texts into His description of Jesus in 1 Peter 2:6-8: “Behold I lay in Zion a choice stone, a precious corner stone, and he who believes in Him shall not be disappointed” (Isa. 28:16); “The stone which the builders rejected, this became the very cornerstone” (Ps. 118:22); and “A stone of stumbling and a rock of offense” (Isa. 8:14). The parallel is obvious and would be especially meaningful to Peter’s Jewish readers. The expectations of pious Jews throughout history were realized in Christ. God had kept His promise to send the Messiah!

Second, Jesus is a stone in that He is the focal point of His spiritual house, the church. The Greek word translated “stone” in verse 4 sometimes referred to the stones used in building projects. They were cut and chiseled to fit perfectly into a specific location, and were practically immovable. Not only is Jesus a stone; He is the cornerstone, which is the most important stone in the entire building. From Him the church draws its spiritual symmetry.

Finally, Jesus is living. That’s an appropriate description because everything Peter said in this epistle is based on the fact that Jesus is alive. That’s the believer’s hope and the basis for every spiritual privilege you have. You “have been born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead” (1 Pet. 1:3, emphasis added).

Interestingly, the literal rendering of 1 Peter 2:4 is, “Coming to Him as to living stone.” Christ is a unique stone—the stone that possesses life. All who come to Him receive eternal life (cf. 1 John 5:11).

Suggestions for Prayer

-Praise the Lord for His unchangeable character and irrevocable promises.

For Further Study

-Read Acts 2:22-47.

-What was the central point in Peter’s sermon?

-How did the people respond to his preaching?

-How many people were baptized?

-What were some of the activities of the early church?

John MacArthur, Grace Lutheran Church

Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.” That Bible verse, found in Proverbs 14:34, is not a political slogan. It is a moral law of history. Nations rise when justice, truth, humility, courage, and reverence for God shape their public life. They decline when sin becomes normalized, truth is considered subjective, and liberty is severed from biblical virtue.

The founders of America understood this better than we realize.

After the Revolutionary War, George Washington wrote to the governors of the thirteen states and prayed that God would dispose Americans “to do justice, to love mercy,” and to imitate the charity, humility, and peaceable spirit of “the Divine Author of our blessed Religion.” Without that, Washington said, “we can never hope to be a happy nation.”[1]

In his first inaugural address, Washington acknowledged “the Invisible Hand” that had guided the United States. He warned that “the propitious smiles of Heaven” could never be expected to shine on a nation that disregarded “the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained”—referring to the Bible.[2]

John Adams made the same point in different words. He believed the Bible contained “the most perfect morality” and was the only system capable of preserving a republic.[3]

Long before Washington and Adams, a Puritan pastor named Thomas Hooker helped shape America’s political imagination. In 1633, Hooker became pastor of a congregation near Cambridge, Massachusetts, and later helped establish Hartford, Connecticut. Studying Deuteronomy 1:13, where Moses instructed Israel to choose wise and understanding leaders, Hooker concluded that civil leaders should be chosen by the people. “The choice of public magistrates belongs unto the people by God’s own allowance,” he preached. “The foundation of authority is laid, firstly, in the free consent of the people.”[4]

Those ideas created the climate that led to the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, often regarded as the first written constitution in the American colonies with a democratic tone. It is one reason Connecticut is still known as the Constitution State.

Another biblical text shaped the debate over liberty and authority—Romans 13:1, which teaches that governing authorities are instituted by God. On January 30, 1750, Jonathan Mayhew preached a sermon based on this verse titled A Discourse Concerning Unlimited Submission and Non-Resistance to the High Powers. He taught that government is accountable to God. When rulers fulfill their God-given role, they deserve respect and obedience. But when they become tyrants and oppressors, they violate the purpose for which government exists.[5]

John Adams later called Mayhew’s sermon “the catechism of the Revolution.” It gave many colonists a biblical framework for understanding resistance to tyranny.

Then came prayer. In September 1774, delegates gathered in Philadelphia for the First Continental Congress. Before beginning their work, they agreed to open in prayer and invited Jacob Duché, an Anglican pastor, to lead them. The previous evening, a frightening rumor had spread that British forces were shelling Boston. As Washington, Adams, Hancock, Henry, and others gathered in Carpenter’s Hall, Duché read the appointed Scripture reading for the day—Psalm 35: “Plead my cause, O LORD, with those who strive with me; fight against those who fight against me.”

John Adams later wrote to Abigail that he had never heard a better prayer. It seemed, he said, as though Heaven had ordained that Psalm for that morning.[6]

The American Revolution was not only fought on battlefields. It was also interpreted from pulpits. After the shots at Lexington and Concord, Pastor Jonas Clark looked to Joel 3, where God condemns the shedding of innocent blood. Seven members of his congregation had died near the church at Lexington. Their blood, he believed, testified to the seriousness of the hour. Clark reminded his people that however dark events appeared, God still ruled over nations. “An all-wise God is seated on the throne,” he said. That conviction steadied Americans through perilous days.[7]

When victory came at Yorktown, another biblical text came to the forefront. On October 20, 1781, the day after Cornwallis surrendered, chaplain Israel Evans preached to the American troops from 1 Samuel 7:12: “Hitherto the LORD has helped us.” Like Samuel raising his Ebenezer stone after victory, Evans called the army to remember that their help had come from God. America, he said, should learn her happiness as a nation from dependence on Almighty God.[8]

Winning independence was one thing. Framing a government was another. In 1787, the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia seemed near collapse. At that moment, Benjamin Franklin, then eighty-one, rose and asked why they had not sought the help of “the Father of Lights.”

“I have lived, sir, a long time,” Franklin said, “and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men.” He cited Psalm 127:1: “Except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it.”[9]

His motion for prayer did not formally pass, but the words hung over the convention. A few days later, Washington led delegates to a prayer service. Eventually, the Constitution emerged with its opening words: “We the People.”

James Madison later reflected that it was impossible for a thoughtful believer not to perceive in those events “a finger of that Almighty Hand.”[10]

Proverbs 14:34 contains both promise and warning: “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.” That truth applies to nations, but it also applies to individuals. Perhaps that is why my final story belongs not to a battlefield or convention hall, but to a deathbed. Alexander Hamilton, mortally wounded in his duel with Aaron Burr, asked for Christian counsel and communion. Presbyterian pastor John Mason spoke to him of Christ, quoting Acts 4:12: “There is salvation in no one else.”

Hamilton replied, “I have a tender reliance on the mercy of the Almighty, through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ.” Before receiving communion from Bishop Benjamin Moore, Hamilton renounced his sins and embraced Christ his Savior. His last words to his wife were, “Remember, my Eliza, you are a Christian.”[11]

America’s hope has never rested ultimately in presidents, armies, constitutions, courts, or elections. These are not enough. The deeper question is moral and spiritual. Can a people remain free without righteousness? Can liberty endure without virtue? Can any nation disregard God’s eternal rules of order and right and still expect the smiles of Heaven?

Let me go back to my opening verse: “Righteousness exalts a nation. Sin is a reproach to any people.” No matter how advanced we may feel we are, we can never escape the truth of that ancient proverb.

Pastor Robert Morgan

Europeans are divided over whether the EU should move closer to the United States or to China, according to new polling shared exclusively with POLITICO that highlights how Donald Trump’s second presidency has upended long-standing geopolitical loyalties.

In a survey conducted in June by pollster Public First across 24 EU countries, respondents in eight countries leaned toward stronger relations with China, nine favored the U.S. and seven were effectively split between the two.

In 14 countries, the single most common response was “I don’t know” — with more people giving that answer than backing either Washington or Beijing.

The responses underscore the difficult situation facing the bloc, as political and trade tensions strain relations with the two global superpowers — its two largest trading partners.

Brussels is implementing a one-sided trade deal with the Trump administration, while it faces progressive deindustrialization driven by a surge of Chinese exports including electric vehicles.

“Europeans see distance from America as achievable and, in some countries, already the majority preference. They see reliance on China as more of a necessity, and efforts to mitigate it as wishful thinking,” said Seb Wride, head of opinion research at Public First.

“It would be poor timing for Trump’s actions to set up a choice between the U.S. and China — for many Europeans the U.S. is optional, and China essential,” he added.

What the data makes clear is that in Western Europe, the U.S. is no longer seen as a reliable ally.

Italy and Spain, for example, are in the China camp, the latter solidly so. Other heavy hitters France and Germany were uncertain, with a majority answering that they didn’t know who to choose between the two. 

Donald Trump has made his disdain of Europe’s leadership a recurring theme of his presidency. He’s insulted them, imposed unilateral tariffs on the bloc, withdrawn U.S. troops from the continent, and even threatened to annex Greenland, a Danish sovereign territory. 

Several EU leaders — from Spain’s Pedro Sánchez to Denmark’s Mette Frederiksen — have seen their popularity rise after confronting the U.S. president, underscoring how unpopular he is abroad. Even traditional allies, like Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, are moving away from him. 

The trend isn’t continent-wide: Respondents in Eastern Europe, which has long clung to the U.S. as a guarantor of the post-Cold War order, continue to see America favorably. Poland, Lithuania and Estonia, for example, are all solidly in Washington’s camp.

Beijing doesn’t offer a straightforward alternative to the historical U.S. relationship.

Roaring Chinese imports are undermining traditional European manufacturing, from chemicals to carmaking. Earlier this week, the European Commission said that it was in talks with China to try and find a more balanced trade arrangement; it wants progress on the issue by October.

The polling data suggests that EU citizens view Europe’s trade ties with China as a matter of fact, rather than choice.

Across the 24 countries in the survey, 38 percent of respondents said that, while reducing reliance on China sounded good, it was an unrealistic idea. That was the most common view in all countries except Sweden and Denmark, where similar shares thought the bloc should try to reverse the EU’s dependence on China.

Across the bloc, just 26 percent agreed that it would be both doable and desirable to do so; while another 19 percent said the bloc shouldn’t be trying to cut its reliance on China anyway.

What’s more — Europeans see China, and not the U.S., as the future. In the poll, 43 percent of respondents said they expected China to be Europe’s most important trading partner in 10 years. Just 27 percent picked the U.S.

By country, more people in 23 of the 24 countries covered said they expect China to be Europe’s top trade partner in a decade’s time. Only Lithuanians clearly favored the U.S.

By Reuters

LONDON, July 1 (Reuters) – Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Wednesday that racism and intolerance had worsened in Britain over the past decade, warning it was ​damaging social cohesion and deterring people from public life.

He spoke ‌a day after a Reuters report found some Britons of colour fear a resurgence of racism linked to anti-migrant rhetoric and a political focus on crime, following recent unrest ​including protests in Southampton after the murder of Henry Nowak and rioting ​in Belfast after a stabbing attack.

Get a look at the day ahead in European and global markets with the Morning Bid Europe newsletter. Sign up here.

Facing questions in parliament, Starmer said “racism ⁠and intolerance is permeating everywhere.”

The British leader was responding to a lawmaker ​who said he was worried that racism and the incitement of violence linked ​to it were being normalised, including by some politicians.

“We have to deal with it, because it’s tearing our societies apart,” Starmer said, adding that “it should be called out ​by every single person who is a politician at any level in ​this country.”

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Starmer recalled the 2016 death of Labour lawmaker Jo Cox, an active supporter of ‌immigration ⁠and social cohesion, who was killed by a far-right extremist days before the Brexit referendum.

He said that when reflecting recently upon her death he felt things had got worse, not better, in the intervening decade.

Tuesday’s Reuters report ​cited warnings from ​trade unions and ⁠professional bodies about rising racist abuse in workplaces and public life, alongside heightened tensions following the unrest across the ​United Kingdom.

Nigel Farage, the leader of populist party Reform ​UK, has ⁠accused British institutions of discriminating against white people, arguing they were biased by policies aimed at supporting ethnic minorities. Starmer has rejected those claims.

Addressing the tone ⁠of ​political debate, Starmer said: “That’s on us to ​fix – every single member of this house, whatever their party is and anybody who inflames it ​should be absolutely ashamed of themselves.”

Reporting by Sam Tabahriti, Editing by William Maclean