A friend of mine posted on Facebook[1] that “All I am saying is give war a chance” is the message of “the left” and of all others who are opposed to President Trump’s approach to Russia’s war in Ukraine. Those who used to sing “All I am saying is give peace a chance” have lost their way, and it’s just because they hate Trump.

I will not pretend that I like Donald Trump — but that is not the issue here.

President Trump’s approach to the war is equivalent to telling a home owner who has suffered a home invasion by the bully next door to stop resisting the invader and give up claim to the parts of the house the invader has occupied, with no guarantees that the invader will not push to eventually occupy the entire house.

At the infamous, disgusting “photo op” at the White House last week President Zelenskyj listed a number of ceasefires agreed between Russia and Ukraine which Putin’s Russia has broken, as the reason for Ukraine’s reluctance to enter into yet another ceasefire with the neighbor who 11 years ago “annexed” their front porch and who 3 years ago started the full scale home invasion that is still going on.

I will always be thankful for the American contribution towards ridding my homeland and all of Europe from the madman Hitler and his nazi henchmen; but I am afraid that if President Trump had been around in the 1940s he would have pressured Britain and France as well as all of the other countries occupied by the Germans to enter into a ceasefire that would have cemented the status quo, with the nazi hordes in control of most of Europe.

What President Trump and those who so enthusiastically support him fail to understand is that peace is more than merely the absence of killing; that yielding to the invader is not peace but appeasement and is an invitation to invade another neighbor.

And those of us bystanders who see Trump’s refusal to honor his country’s obligation under the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 to defend Ukraine’s territorial integrity have no confidence that he will honor his country’s obligation to come to the aid of its NATO allies or to honor its obligation to defend Austria under the 1955 state treaty. We see with increasing clarity that Trump is not a man of honor nor a man of his word, and that he does not feel bound by the contractual obligations of his country.

This is NOT the way to make America great again, and neither are the suggestions of his buddy, weathervane Vance, the way to make Europe great again.

1. Facebook Post[↩]

No, my son has not been murdered, but I was just very moved by the testimony of a father whose son was murdered.

On March 10, 2022, 23-year-old elementary school teacher Michael Echaniz was shot to death by 25-year-old Matthew Wiessing. Several months prior to the murder Wiessing’s girlfriend had terminated their relationship and was now dating Michael Echaniz. This so enraged Wiessing that he shot Michael in the head, not once, but three times.

Wiessing was arrested a little over a week later, after a family member of his noticed his strange behavior immediately after the murder and a 9mm handgun missing from the family home. On July 1, 2022 Wiessing was indicted by the grand jury and a month ago he was sentenced to 40 years in prison, of which he will serve at least 21 years.

After the sentencing Michael’s father John Echaniz addressed Wiessing at length, recounting his family’s and the community’s shock and pain over this brutal act of revenge, culminating with  quote from the gospel, that there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents, saying that he certainly does not want to stand in the way of “more joy in heaven,” that he forgives Matthew and prays that he will find God’s love in Jesus Christ.

The Echaniz family are Catholics, and while I cannot identify with their enthusiasm for praying of the rosary it is exceedingly clear to me that John Echaniz is a man of deep faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and a shining testament to the power of God’s love.

Here is the article by John Echaniz I came across today: https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/02/05/desiring-everyones-salvation-including-my-sons-murderer/, and below is the video of his address to his son’s murderer.

Here is Michael Echinaz with his parents at his college graduation, two years before his death:

Vienna city councilor (ÖVP)  and devout Catholic Jan Ledóchowski [1] laments the fact that the “Right-Wing Extremism Report” [2] of the Documentation Archive of the Austrian Resistance (DÖW) equates terms like “right-wing extremist” and “right-wing Catholic” [3] and mentions him in this context, along with other politically active conservative Christians like Suha Dejmek [4] or Gudrun Kugler [5].

In my opinion, the DÖW, like many other public (state, semi-state, and private) institutions, simply reflects the “political orthodoxy” [6] of the zeitgeist, which does not tolerate opposition to its favored projects (such as abortion rights and the normalization of “alternative sexualities”). An integral part of this political orthodoxy is the premise that political positions stemming from religious beliefs (or religious beliefs not left at the door but leading to political action) are dangerous and potentially violate the separation of church and state, whether they are advocated democratically or pursued by force. For this reason, both conservative Christians and radical Islamists are labeled with the term “fundamentalists”[7] used as a pejorative.

But none of this should surprise us, because around two thousand years ago, the Apostle Paul wrote to his disciple Timothy:

“Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted,”
(2 Timothy 3:12, ESV)

Personally, I would not yet classify the intolerance of political orthodoxy toward religiously motivated beliefs in politics here in Austria (and in most “Western countries”[8] as persecution [9], but it is a precursor that will sooner or later provide the pretext for the coming actual persecution.

1. Jan Ledóchowski is a lawyer, married, and father of five children. As the president of the Platform for Christian Democracy and Vienna city councilor, he advocates for Christian values in politics and for greater political engagement by Christians in Austria.

   [↩]

2. The Right-Wing Extremism Report (Rechtsextremismusbericht) serves to observe and document right-wing extremist structures and includes:

   • Right-wing extremist groups and parties: such as neo-Nazis, fraternities, or the Identitarian movement.
   • Ideological focuses: racism, anti-Semitism, homophobia, nationalism.
   • Crimes: statistics of right-wing extremist offenses (e.g., vandalism, violence, propaganda).
   • Right-wing terrorism and networks: monitoring international connections and potential threats.
   • Internet and social media: the growing role of online platforms in radicalization.

   Until 2001, the report was regularly published by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution and Counterterrorism (BVT). Since then, it has been managed by the Documentation Archive of the Austrian Resistance (DÖW).

   [↩]

3. It is not easy to define these two terms in a way that no one feels discriminated against. The Wikipedia articles on right-wing extremism  provides a good starting point, but (unsurprisingly) it isvery biased. Right-wing Catholicism as a term overlaps with the Christian Right but in its usage in Germany and Austria is more pejorative.

   [↩]

4. Suha Dejmek is a business consultant, evangelical Christian, and ÖVP district councilor in Vienna-Liesing.

   [↩]

5. Gudrun Kugler is a Roman Catholic theologian and lawyer as well as a member of Austria’s parliament representing the ÖVP.

   [↩]

6. “Political orthodoxy” refers to the sum of political and ideological positions and beliefs considered “socially acceptable” in a society; dissenting opinions are stigmatized.

   [↩]

7. The term fundamentalism originally emerged in the early 20th century in American Protestantism to signify a return to the fundamental tenets of Christianity. Over time, the term became neutral and then negative, used to describe a dogmatic and uncompromising attitude. It was eventually applied to movements in other religions, such as Islamism, Orthodox Judaism, or Hindu nationalism, and now even to secular ideological movements that take an uncompromising stance.

   [↩]

8. “Western countries” typically refer to nations that share cultural, political, and historical ties to Western Europe and its global influence. These countries are often characterized by:

   1. Geography:

      • Western Europe (e.g., Germany, France, the UK).
      • Countries with cultural roots in Europe, like the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

   2. Political Systems:

      • Democracies with systems emphasizing individual rights, rule of law, and separation of powers.

   3. Economic Characteristics:

      • Market-oriented economies with advanced infrastructure and industries.

   4. Cultural and Religious Foundations:

      • Historically influenced by Greco-Roman traditions, Christianity, and Enlightenment ideals.

   5. Global Context:

      • Often contrasted with “Eastern countries” or “Global South,” including regions influenced by different traditions, such as Asia, the Middle East, or Africa.

   While the term is widely used, its definition can vary depending on the context, sometimes encompassing cultural, economic, or political factors rather than strictly geographic ones.

   [↩]

9. The European Union defines religious or ideological persecution as follows:

   1. Persecution, as defined in Article 1A of the Geneva Refugee Convention, includes actions that:

      • Due to their nature or repetition, are so severe that they constitute a serious violation of fundamental human rights, particularly those rights from which no derogation is permitted under Article 15(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights, or
      • Consist of a cumulative series of measures, including human rights violations, which are so severe that they affect a person in a similar manner as described in (a).

   2. Acts considered persecution include:

      • Physical or psychological violence, including sexual violence,
      • Discriminatory legal, administrative, police, and/or judicial measures, or their discriminatory application,
      • Disproportionate or discriminatory prosecution or punishment,
      • Denial of judicial protection, resulting in disproportionate or discriminatory punishment,
      • Prosecution or punishment for refusing military service in a conflict involving crimes or acts covered by Article 12(2)’s exclusion clauses,
      • Acts based on gender or directed against children.

   3. There must be a connection between the grounds in Article 10 and the acts defined as persecution in paragraph 1.

   [↩]

I am currently reading through Faye Kellerman’s novel “The Burnt House”, part of her “Peter Decker & Rina Lazarus” series.

Rina is a life-long orthodox Jew, Los Angeles police detective Peter “Akiva” is Jewish by birth but was adopted by gentiles and only came to Jewish faith and observance about 17 years ago in the wake of his love for Rina.

Here is an interesting conversation about faith and doubt as it relates to ultimate justice:

“I certainly hope so. It pisses me off that a murderer has eluded justice.”

“He’ll eventually have to account for his actions. Maybe it won’t be to you or to the criminal justice system, but certainly to a higher authority. What goes around comes around: Middah keneged mid-dah.”

“I wish I believed that.”

“Sometimes I don’t even know if I believe that. But that’s the basis of faith, and I’m a woman of faith.” Rina put down her book. “These cold cases must be frustrating. … I know it upsets you that someone got away with murder, but eventually we all die, and that’s when everyone sees that, ultimately, someone else is in control.”

“But just suppose you die and that’s it?” Decker said. “I mean that’s really it! You’re nothing but maggot food.”

“Maybe that’s the case,” Rina said. “Since no one really knows, I choose to believe otherwise. Even if it turns out that I was sold a false bill of goods, I think believing in God is a healthier way to live. Faith is for the living, Akiva, not the dead.”

Faye & Jonathan Kellerman

I am a gentile, evangelical Christian, not an observant Jew, but I find it fascinating how such “Jewish” conversations resonate with my own experience as a believer. And I generally find “secular” novels with characters who are people of faith, whether Jewish or Christian, even if they are nor portrayed as perfect or saintly, more interesting than explicitly “Christian” novels where the believers tend to be “goody two-shoes” — because, let’s be real: we are not all perfect and saintly, either, and we have our share of crooks in our ranks even though we are quick to either close our eyes to their faults or else to disown them if they are too much of an embarrassment.

On Facebook every now and then someone will post a “How many squares in this image?” riddle, and in the comments the answers will range from acurate to ignorant to outlandishly stupid. Today I came across this image:

Thousands of comments with answers from 6 to 18, so I set out to write a little PHP and Javascript program to count and visualize the squares.

For those not sure of the terminology:

• all the shapes in this image are rectangles, i.e. their corners are all 90º;
• however, not all of them are squares, i.e. equilateral rectangles, with four identical sides.

Also, while there are only four shapes in this image which are themselves squares, combinations of two or more shapes also form squares and will be counted as such.

So here we go:

As this demonstrates, there are:

• 6 single, simple squares (1-6),
• 5 composite squares made up of two to four single squares 7-11), and
• finally the whole image is also a square (12),

which makes a total of twelve squares.

Multi-instrumentalist Brackin Kirkland together with his lovely wife Lindsay and their seven children (six boys and one girl) are a homeschooling, musically gifted Christian family who live in North Carolina and have been vlogging on YouTube since 2015. On “Sounds Like Reign” they present music videos to go with their albums (ten so far), and on “Tiny Notes from Home” until recently they shared the life of their family and also interviewed other families.

Sounds Like Reign’s music can also be found on Facebook and Spotify. On their web page all albums can be downloaded for free.

Two years ago they released an album “King Jesus” and I thought this would make suitable listening to accompany the Feast of Christ the King which many liturgical churches celebrate on the last Sunday of the church year, i.e this upcoming Sunday, November 24, 2024.

Here are Links to their other album playlists on Youtube:

For eight years, I have made it no secret that I do not consider Donald Trump qualified to be the head of state and government of the most powerful nation in the Western world—primarily due to his character and temperament—and I have therefore been criticized by many of my American evangelical friends. They claim American politics is none of my business since I am neither a U.S. citizen nor a resident of the U.S. I have always disagreed—sometimes sharply—and insisted that I am very much entitled to have an opinion on U.S. politics and to express it because America, as the most powerful country (at least in the “Western” world), influences all our lives. I have also been a lifelong admirer of America, who has never forgotten that without the decisive involvement of the United States in World War II, I probably would not be living in a democratic country today. Additionally, I grew up in a home funded by the Marshall Plan, so the fate of this country is very dear to my heart.

Unfortunately, my enthusiasm and sympathy for the country have significantly diminished in recent years because I couldn’t understand how a country with around 300 million citizens, about half of whom are eligible to vote, could not find better candidates in the last three presidential elections than Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris—a real indictment. Other weaknesses have also come into sharper focus: the inability to curb the gun epidemic and the resulting mass shootings in schools and elsewhere, the inability to ensure an affordable healthcare system, especially for the poorer and more disadvantaged sections of society, and the increase in racially motivated attacks by police, to name just a few examples.

I have also become severely disillusioned about American Evangelicalism which has been a very formative influence in my life: It is incomprehensible to me how around 82 percent of American Evangelicals could, encouraged by many of their most prominent leaders, vote for a foul-mouthed serial adulterer who boasts of sexually harrassing women, demonizes his political and displays his dehumanizing disdain for people of color, women, the handicapped, members of the LGBT community, and immigrants.

Throughout it all, I never imagined that my very vocal opposition would have any effect on the outcome of the election, and sure enough it didn’t: Donald Trump won the election by a landslide, and if nothing unforeseen happens, he will steer the United States’ affairs as the 47th president for the next four years, thereby also exerting a great deal of influence on the rest of the world.

For a long time, I looked at Trump supporters among my friends, and especially among evangelical leaders, with great incomprehension, and in some cases, I was tempted to break off contact. However, I have since revised my stance on this, especially concerning ordinary voters—though I remain very disappointed and critical of evangelical leaders who brush aside Trump’s character deficits with sometimes bizarre theological arguments (it seems character only matters in political opponents, not in our own candidates).

This lengthy process of changing my attitude is difficult to describe and is probably still incomplete, but on the Monday before the election, and then three days afterward, I came across a few articles that reflect my thoughts better than I could describe them myself and that have also given me further food for thought.

First, there was a lead article in the news magazine profil on Monday by Robert Treichler titled “America Wants to Dream”(4), in which he describes Trump’s appeal to voters:

What is Kamala Harris’s great promise? No, I don’t mean a list of proposals from all kinds of fields, but a big idea that can deeply resonate with 150 million people.

I fear there isn’t one. The only issue Harris addressed in an emotionally stirring way during the campaign is the right to abortion. But that’s not an overarching idea for the entire nation.

Trump has such a promise: “Make America Great Again.” This simple slogan, with which Trump has campaigned for a third time, embodies many motives that create a political sense of identity. The desire for strength, a return to old, disreputable ideas, a commitment to ruthlessness toward opponents, and defiance of moralistic objections…

Trump intertwines his slogan with his numerous character flaws. But the vow to make America great again apparently still outshines all the unspeakable things.

In the same issue, Siobhán Geets and Robert Treichler answer 47 questions about the U.S. presidential election in an article titled “Do You Understand America?”. It begins:

Would you vote for a black woman or a man convicted of sexual abuse, who is also suspected of attempted election fraud and inciting an uprising? You may not have to think long. The trickier question is: Why does the above-mentioned convicted felon—you’ve recognized him by now, it’s Donald Trump—have a good chance of being elected the 47th president of the United States next Tuesday?

Trump’s ongoing popularity and political success are baffling. But there are explanations: It is a fact that Trump recognized the problem of illegal immigration early on and made it a political megatopic, similar to right-wing parties in Europe. In his unique style of grotesque exaggerations, he demonizes migrants as murderers and rapists, even going so far as to claim that immigrants from Haiti “eat other people’s pets.” Nevertheless, even though Democrats have since imposed restrictive measures against illegal immigration, a large portion of the population grants them no credibility on this central issue.

Additionally, the politically charged question of identity politics comes into play. Democrats fight for diversity, LGBTQ rights, and abortion rights. John Della Volpe, director at Harvard Kennedy School’s Institute of Politics and a former advisor to Joe Biden, warns that they are neglecting men in the process. These men increasingly turn to the Republicans, who promote a carefree role model with limited tolerance for patriarchal and sexist behaviors. It’s entirely normal for one half of the population to want something different than the other half.

However, the problematic aspect is that the two halves no longer seem to meet on any level—not even figuratively. Trump supporters believe the 2020 election was rigged, dismiss court rulings, ignore warnings from his former associates about Trump being dangerous or even fascistic. Thus, all accusations from the other side fall flat.

Although Trump himself says outrageous things, such as wanting to use the military against “enemies from within”—meaning his opponents within the U.S.—his supporters dismiss these as typical exaggerations. Meanwhile, the other half of the country shudders in horror.

Similar reflections to these during the past year have led me to try to understand ordinary Trump voters better and to approach them with more tolerance.

Finally, three days after the election Jonah Goldberg’s newsletter titled “Stop Bashing Democracy!” arrived in my inbox. He writes:

And that, in a nutshell, is the grave error people are making. People vote for candidates—any candidate—for lots of different reasons. If you think Trump is a fascist, fine. We can talk about that. But just because you think he’s a fascist doesn’t mean someone who voted for him agrees with you and voted for him anyway. I know dozens of people who voted for Trump. None of them are idiots or fascists or fascist idiots.

This argument works every bit as much in the other direction. You may think Kamala Harris is a “communist” or “Marxist,” etc. Whether she is or not is a debatable proposition in the sense that it can be debated. But if you want people to agree with you, you need to make the argument, not just hurl the accusation. If you’re sure she is a communist, no one can deny you the right to say so—but saying so doesn’t mean everyone has to agree with you. Very few of the 68 million people who voted for Harris did so because they thought she was a Marxist or a communist.

I still believe I am correct in my assessment of Donald Trump, and that Trump’s supporters are mistaken, but I now understand them better, especially since Kamala Harris (just like Hillary Clinton eight years ago) was only a marginally less problematic candidate.

Now, lets jump back across the Atlantic to my country, Austria. Much of what Robert Treichler and Siobhán Geets write can be applied almost one-to-one to our situation, where Herbert Kickl, in my opinion a completely unsuitable candidate, won the most votes in the parliamentary election. Fortunately, he did not receive a governing majority, and no one wants to form a coalition with him, so there is a good chance we will have a coalition government, possibly involving the ÖVP, SPÖ, and perhaps NEOS.

But one thing is clear: if the new government continues with “business as usual”, Kickl will garner even more votes in four years, and perhaps even an “absolute majority”, enough to govern. Blaming it on stupid voters won’t help then either. Because the problem here, as in America (and many other countries), is the same: a political class, an aspiring elite too committed to their own interests and ideological pet issues to care about the concerns and fears of ordinary citizens. It may take different forms in America and here, but at its core, it’s the same.

Footnotes:

• • Note 1: These figures are estimates from 2020 ↩️
  • Note 2: Robert Treichler was born in 1968 in Graz, studied French and philosophy, and has been a journalist with the news magazine profil since 1997, serving as deputy editor-in-chief since 2021. In 2024, together with Gernot Bauer, he published the book Kickl und die Zerstörung Europas (Kickl and the Destruction of Europe) with Zsolnay. ↩️
  • Note 3: Siobhán Kathleen Geets, born in 1984 in Vienna, studied cultural and social anthropology at the University of Vienna with a focus on gender studies, international development, philosophy, and religious studies. She completed her thesis on ladyboys in Thailand and was awarded her degree in May 2008. From October 2008 to September 2009, she attended a course at the Vienna School of Photography. In January to February 2008 and February to March 2009, she conducted field research in Thailand, interviewing ladyboys for her thesis and a radio feature for Ö1. Since 2020, she has been part of the foreign affairs team at profil. ↩️

Recently I acquired a discounted collection of Michael Connelly’s novels[1], foremost among them the more than twenty novels featuring LAPD[2] homicide detective Hieronymous “Harry” Bosch, and I was instantly hooked and spent two weeks binge-reading them.

What impressed me about Connelly’s novels, apart from the fact that he is a brilliant story teller, is the meticulous research which has gone into providing a lot of factual information about the LAPD and other Los Angeles institutions.

Because I find the Wikipedia article about Harry Bosch well-written and informative, I am including much of it here:

1. https://thrillerandhorror.com/product/complete-works-of-michael-connelly/[↩]
2. Los Angeles Police Department[↩]

Taken from Wikipedia for my own reference.

The Austrian Broadcasting news portal ORF Online reports that Qatar has asked members of the terrorist organization Hamas to leave the country, reportedly at the urgent request of the United States.

The report includes this paragraph:

«The recent U.S. decision was partly influenced by the execution of American-Israeli citizen Hersh Goldberg-Polin and five other hostages by Hamas at the end of August, according to a U.S. official speaking to the ‘Times of Israel.’»

In the German original the word here translated “execution” is “Hinrichtung, which like “execution”, describes, in its narrow, original sense, the carrying out of a legal death sentence.[[Regardless of what one thinks of the moral status of capital punishment there is a big difference between a sentence being carried out after a trial an a verdict by lawful authority on the one hand and the wanton killing by criminals and terrorists (not that I think there’s much difference between these two categories) on the other.]]

I consider it very problematic that these two terms, “Hinrichtung” and “execution” is regularly used to describe the illegal killing of people by criminals and terrorists. In reality, this is murder. The killing of hostages is nothing but cowardly murder.

Describing such acts as “executions” gives both the act and the perpetrators a veneer of respectability and legitimacy they do not deserve.

The language we use, as well as the words we choose, is very important.