By David Warren.

But first a note from Robert Royal:

As David Warren argues today - and we all always need to keep in mind - we've all been given a great gift that transcends all our earthly concerns. We experienced something of the heavenly banquet yesterday in our Thanksgiving Day celebrations. But today we must be back offering our own gifts. The Catholic Thing has been a gift to those of us fortunate enough to produce it. And I hope that's also true for those of you who read us every day. For that gift to continue, we need you. So please, don't put it off. Click the button below and add your gift to the work of The Catholic Thing. Today.

Now for today's column...

Politics is a constant source of confusion and anxiety. I should think all parties will agree with this, though half of each for the wrong reasons.

The result of the recent American federal election came as a surprise to me. Americans seem to be taking it well - there was far less violence than had been anticipated, and in the end no prospect of a civil war.

I am myself generally an enthusiast for the peaceful transfer of power - although I think transferring it to (actual) Nazis, Fascists, Communists, or the proponents of other unambiguously evil ideologies, ought to be violently resisted.

Alas, when democrats (of any party) call their opponents in an election, casually and ignorantly - "Nazis," "Fascists," "Communists," and so forth - they contribute to our confusion and anxiety.

I wasn't expecting the Republicans to win. When I heard the media "reporting" that "white women" would vote for Kamala and Tim with a margin of 14 percent, I assumed the game was up. Another election, it seemed, was fixed.

Donald and J.D. might win as many votes, overall, but the white women would decide it, and they would all be voting for "abortion rights." They would clinch all the swing states with tiny margins, perhaps with ballots delivered a bit late. (I call them the "dead baby voters.")

But I shouldn't have believed what "progressive" media were reporting. They give lying a bad name.

Still, I thought I could see what was happening. The women's vote projections were themselves part of a steal. Republican women would be intimidated and stay home. And Barack Obama would tell blacks to vote as a block.

This, unless I am mistaken, is how they won in 2020.

But the difference was Mrs. Lara Trump, the Republican chairwoman who orchestrated an unprecedented ballot watch. She had spent big money on agents and lawyers. Their extraordinary efforts paid off.

It was a Republican landslide, despite various "innovative voting reforms" that Democrat states had introduced.

My own preference is for absolute monarchies, or even constitutional republics, not based too obviously on fraud, though I understand they are the way of the world. But the demand for "equality" makes number games inevitable. (The reader may think this through.)

Should the numbers be trusted, however, in defiance of Christian reason? We are told not to put our faith in the children of men, so why trust a statistical sampling?

A government truly for the people, cannot be by the people, or it will promptly dissolve in vulgar power-plays. Instead, if we are looking for something reliable, we should look to the inhuman, and for our laws to God, visible over time.

For from the beginning of time, He was there.

Human authority should be obeyed - even democratic institutions - until they begin to contradict the divine. But the democratic insistence on equality negates freedom, justice, and every other ideal.

It is enough to be just, and free; to be a good man, and thus aware of the beauty that can save the world.

The people must at least be Christianized.

The idea of a "Christian democracy" was among the naive proposals of the last century, along with the "United Nations" and "world peace." It seemed plausible that the European continent, peopled overwhelmingly by nominal Christians (as it once was) could be trusted to defend Chris...