In my view, ideological pressures have shaped scholarship and made certain questions difficult to examine openly. This is not a new problem. When I visited the Museum of the Bible and spent time with the Dead Sea Scrolls exhibition and related high-level books on the formation of the biblical canon, the transition from earlier Near Eastern traditions to the exclusive worship of Yahweh, and the pre-Israelite cultures of Canaan, I kept encountering the same pattern: ritual practices involving fertility, sacrifice, and the role of women were either minimized or reframed in ways that avoided uncomfortable historical realities. The same tendency appears in discussions of pre-Columbian copper-working cultures around Lake Superior, where evidence of large-scale indigenous mining dating back thousands of years is accepted, yet contemporary academic assumptions often constrain questions about broader cultural contacts, religious practices, or the nature of those societies.
I wanted to test one specific question with direct observation rather than theory alone. The question concerned how women, particularly those in childbearing years, respond under sudden fear, and whether that response retains traces of older cultural and biological patterns. Ancient Near Eastern sources, including biblical condemnations of Canaanite practices, describe fertility cults associated with deities such as Baal and Asherah/Astarte. These involved sexual rites intended to stimulate agricultural and human fertility through sympathetic magic. While modern scholarship has become more cautious about the precise scale of “sacred prostitution,” the biblical texts themselves (Deuteronomy 23, Hosea 4, 2 Kings 23) treat the practices as real and objectionable enough to prohibit. Parallel patterns appear in accounts of other cultures that used sexual signaling or ritualized access to women as a means of managing powerful or dangerous forces.
An Observational Method: Playing Jason at Kings Island
In the fall of 2026, I auditioned for and worked as Jason Voorhees in the Jason: Blood Reign attraction at Kings Island’s Halloween Haunt. The role placed me in a controlled environment where thousands of guests moved through a maze under strobe lights, timed sound effects, and deliberate jump scares. I was often at the curtain, where timing and speed produced consistent reactions. Over multiple eight-hour shifts, I observed a broad cross-section of Cincinnati and southern Ohio residents. The hockey mask created a psychological barrier that made sustained observation easier than face-to-face interaction.
Men and women reacted differently under the same stimulus. Men often stiffened, tried to project toughness, or positioned themselves protectively. A noticeable subset of women in the approximate age range of the late teens through the early fifties—the years when sexual signaling capacity is highest—responded by flashing, winking, sticking out their tongues, making explicit sexual gestures, or saying some version of “Jason, I love you.” I estimated this at roughly five percent of the women who passed through under direct scare conditions, with a larger group showing subtler eye contact or flirtatious recovery behaviors once the immediate fright subsided. These were not isolated incidents. They repeated night after night across a large sample.
Historical and Biological Context
The pattern is consistent with both historical fertility practices and with findings in evolutionary psychology. Anne Campbell’s work on sex differences in fear, and the broader “staying alive” literature, documents that women on average exhibit stronger fear responses and more self-protective strategies than men. Self-protection carries higher fitness value for women because of the demands of pregnancy and dependent offspring. Sexual signaling is one available tool for reducing threat or securing protection in unstable conditions. In a modern haunted attraction, the threat is theatrical, yet the first-order physiological reaction appears to draw on older circuitry.
The same logic appears in non-theatrical settings. Women at rock concerts and at Mardi Gras flash as a status display and a way to seek access from high-status males in the room. The behavior is not random. It is a calculated or semi-automatic use of a resource historically exchanged for security, resources, or reduced danger. Ancient temple practices formalized a version of the same exchange. Contemporary culture has largely removed the religious framing while retaining the underlying bargaining pattern.
Why the Observation Matters
I do not claim that five percent of women will behave this way under every form of stress, nor that the behavior defines women as a class. I do claim that the frequency is high enough, and consistent enough across a large public sample, that it cannot be dismissed as noise. It also cannot be fully explained by “just having fun in a haunted house.” The guests knew they were in a commercial attraction. The response still emerged when fear was suddenly activated. Evolutionary and historical accounts predict exactly this kind of residual pattern; much current academic and political discourse treats the pattern as either nonexistent or unmentionable.
The biblical narrative of Eve and the serpent is one ancient attempt to describe a recurring vulnerability: a point of entry through which external influence can operate by appealing to desire rather than force. Cultures that later restricted women’s formal political or economic roles often cited long observation of this dynamic, not abstract misogyny. Whether those restrictions were justified in every case is a separate question. The observational record, both ancient and modern, shows that a non-trivial minority of women will use sexual access as a primary tool for securing safety or advantage when other tools feel unavailable. Pretending the pattern does not exist does not make the underlying incentives disappear.
This short account is the observational core of a longer project. The data come from repeated, structured exposure to the same stimulus across thousands of people in a single season. Further controlled work would be useful. What I observed at Kings Island in October 2026 is not an outlier. It is a visible remainder of patterns that ancient texts, archaeological records, and evolutionary psychology have all described from different directions. The question is whether contemporary scholarship is willing to look at the remainder directly.
Footnotes
1. Museum of the Bible hosted an authenticated Dead Sea Scrolls exhibition in partnership with the Israel Antiquities Authority beginning in November 2025, distinct from earlier forged fragments previously associated with the museum.
2. Lake Superior copper mining by indigenous groups is documented from roughly 9,500–6,000 years ago onward, with thousands of pits and cold-hammered artifacts recovered from Isle Royale and the Keweenaw Peninsula.
3. Biblical prohibitions on cultic sexual practices appear in Deuteronomy 23:17–18, Hosea 4:14, and the Josiah reforms in 2 Kings 23:7. Scholarly debate continues over the precise institutional form of these practices, but the texts treat them as real and objectionable.
4. Anne Campbell and subsequent work on the “staying alive” hypothesis document consistent sex differences in fear intensity and self-protective behavior across multiple threat domains.
5. The five-percent figure is an observational estimate based on repeated shifts in the Jason: Blood Rain attraction; it is not a formal statistical sample but reflects consistent patterning across a large public throughput.
Bibliography
• Campbell, Anne. Sex Differences in Fear Response: An Evolutionary Perspective. Springer, 2021.
• Benenson, Joyce F., et al. “Self-protection as an adaptive female strategy.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2021.
• Lipiński, Edward. “Cult Prostitution and Passage Rites in the Biblical World.” The Biblical Annals, 2019.
• Pompeani, David P., et al. “Copper mining on Isle Royale 6500–5400 years ago.” The Holocene, 2015.
• Scientific American reporting on lead-isotope evidence for Archaic copper production in the Lake Superior basin.
• Museum of the Bible / Israel Antiquities Authority materials on the 2025–2026 Dead Sea Scrolls exhibition.
• Biblical texts: Deuteronomy 23, Hosea 4, 2 Kings 23; Ugaritic mythological texts on Baal and Anat.
• Herodotus, Histories (on Babylonian temple practices); comparative ancient Near Eastern sources collected in Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament.
• Buss, David M. and related evolutionary psychology literature on female threat management and sexual signaling.
• Hoffman, Rich. Prior essays and podcast material on the politics of fear, institutional incentives, and the limits of contemporary academic framing.
Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly by email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com. If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.
On Election Day 2026, the numbers told a clearer story than the early-vote headlines or the media’s pre-election framing. I told people on election eve that I would rather be a Republican than a Democrat going into the final hours. The reason was simple arithmetic, not spin. Democrats had front-loaded what they had. They borrowed from their own limited voter bank to create early-vote optics, and when the same-day tallies began to roll in, the tank was emptier than their strategy required.
Early Voting as a Borrowed-Time Strategy
Democrats and their allies treated early and mail voting as a way to bank votes, publish encouraging numbers, and energize what remained of their base. Nationally, early ballots set a midterm record—more than 50 million cast before November 3, according to University of Florida Election Lab tracking and contemporaneous reports. In states that report party affiliation of early voters, registered Democrats often led the early returns. In Ohio, more than 1.7 million people voted early, another record. Roughly 48 percent of registered Democrats had already cast ballots versus about 32 percent of registered Republicans, with unaffiliated voters forming the largest single group.
That looks decisive until you examine what it actually represents. Early voting pulled forward the voters Democrats already possessed. It did not create new ones at scale. The strategy assumed that publishing strong early numbers would produce a surge of additional Democrat turnout on Election Day. Instead, many of the people who vote early are the high-propensity partisans who would have voted anyway. Once those ballots were banked, the remaining pool was thinner. I have watched enough cycles to know that public-relations firms and campaign consultants understand this trade-off; the media often does not.
There Simply Are Not Enough Democrats
In the states that track party registration, Democrats still hold a numerical edge on the rolls—roughly 45 million registered Democrats to about 39 million registered Republicans, with a large independent or unaffiliated bloc in between, per compilations of state data. That edge is real on paper and concentrated in a handful of large states. It is not the same as a governing majority across the map. Most of the country remains red or red-leaning once you move past the dense urban cores and coastal corridors. People who acquire houses, raise children, and accumulate assets tend to shift toward the party that prioritizes protecting those things. Public-school indoctrination produced a temporary cohort of younger voters who identified as Democrats; life and economic responsibility have eroded that edge for years.
The Democratic Party’s core problem is demographic and ideological. Its activist wing operates as a minority coalition of radical progressives—socialists and cultural revolutionaries under a different label—trying to govern a country that does not share its priorities. They compensate with early-vote concentration, mail-ballot volume, and media amplification. When same-day voting arrives, the math reasserts itself. Republicans do not need every one of their voters to show up in perfect formation. There are simply more of them in the places that decide most races, and they still prefer Election Day.
Ohio, Ramaswamy, and the Local Test
In Ohio the pattern was visible in real time. The state has trended Republican for more than a decade. Vivek Ramaswamy’s campaign for governor faced a well-funded challenge from Amy Acton, and early-vote numbers gave Democrats their expected edge among affiliated voters. Talking with people around the Ramaswamy operation on election eve, the internals confirmed what the public data suggested: Acton’s side had performed relatively better in the early window because they had drawn down their available pool. The remaining Election Day electorate was expected to be substantially more Republican.
Locally, the same dynamic appeared at events in West Chester. At Lori’s Roadhouse—the large country venue that regularly hosts Republican gatherings—I spoke with Greg and Lori and others who run and support the place. These are business owners and ordinary residents who vote Republican primarily because they do not want government expanding into every corner of their lives. They are not ideological hardliners. They show up because the alternative is worse. Darby Boddy was able to attend a Republican event without the previous protection-order complications that had limited her participation. Roger Reynolds was there as well. Wins make coalition management harder, not easier. A big-tent party that includes both producers who simply want to be left alone and more committed conservatives will argue about priorities. That friction is the price of actually having enough people to win.
The Football Analogy and the Final Quarter
Think of it as a football game. Democrats entered the fourth quarter having already used their best plays to stay close on the scoreboard. They were down, with limited time and a thinner roster of remaining voters. Republicans, sitting on a larger overall pool, could afford to wait for the same-day rush. Some races would be closer than preferred; some local outcomes would disappoint. Those were the expected variance in a big-tent coalition. They were not evidence that the underlying math had changed. Media outlets that spent the preceding weeks projecting Democratic momentum suddenly discovered, once the Election Day reports began arriving, that the projected wave was smaller than advertised. I had been saying the same thing for weeks because the registration numbers, the historical turnout patterns, and the strategic incentives were already visible.
What the Win Does Not Solve
A Republican-leaning night does not eliminate the internal arguments. Different people join the coalition for different reasons. Some want aggressive cultural pushback. Others want lower taxes, fewer regulations, and the ability to run a business or raise a family without constant interference. Managing that after victories is harder than managing it while losing, because the losers have fewer people to fight among. Democrats would prefer to have that problem. They do not, which is why their strategy relies on concentrating their existing voters, amplifying them through media, and hoping the early numbers create the appearance of a larger force than actually exists.
The 2026 results, as they came in, confirmed the structural reality I described on election eve. There are more Americans who affiliate with, or default to, the Republican side once they have something to protect. Early voting is a useful tool. It is not a substitute for a larger coalition. When the same-day votes were counted, the math reasserted itself.
Bibliography and Further Reading
• University of Florida Election Lab early-vote tracking and state-level party affiliation reports for the 2026 cycle.
• Ohio Secretary of State absentee and early-vote files (daily updates through early November 2026), showing partisan affiliation of returned ballots.
• Ballotpedia and state election-office compilations of registered voters by party in the 31 states that report affiliation.
• Contemporary reporting from the Columbus Dispatch, Cincinnati Enquirer, and national outlets on Ohio early-vote totals and the Ramaswamy–Acton contest.
• Historical midterm turnout analyses comparing 2018, 2022, and 2026 early versus Election Day shares.
• County-level early-vote data from Butler County and surrounding areas relevant to West Chester and local Republican events.
Footnotes
1. National early-vote totals exceeding 50 million and state-level party splits drawn from University of Florida Election Lab and contemporaneous aggregators as of November 3, 2026.
2. Ohio early-vote figures of more than 1.7 million, with higher Democratic share among affiliated voters, from Ohio Secretary of State data reported in the Columbus Dispatch and related coverage.
3. National party-registration estimates (approximately 45 million Democrats, 39 million Republicans in reporting states) compiled from state election offices and secondary aggregations.
4. Local observations from West Chester events at Lori’s Roadhouse and conversations with Ramaswamy campaign affiliates on election eve, consistent with public early-vote patterns in Ohio.
5. Standard midterm pattern in which Election Day electorates are more Republican than early/mail electorates, documented across multiple cycles in states that report mode of voting by party.
Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly by email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com. If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.
I just returned from Lori’s Roadhouse in West Chester, Ohio, after Vivek Ramaswamy’s last campaign stop before the election. A number of Ohio officeholders came out to speak alongside him. The speech was long—longer than ideal for people already heading out to vote—so I will condense the essence of what I heard and what I discussed with people there and afterward.[1]
Lori’s Roadhouse continues to do great things for these kinds of events. The place was packed with signs and energy in a way Amy Acton could never have matched. You will not see that kind of coverage on the news or on Fox, but the basics are clear. The encouragement from the stage was simple: go vote, and call your friends and neighbors to do the same. That is the message I am giving my readers and viewers right now.
I have watched Vivek grow into this role over the years. He was right when he noted in his speech that the campaign launched just a few miles from Lori’s Roadhouse—at the business I ran. I was proud he chose that location, and it was bittersweet to see the campaign season come full circle there. The owners are good people, and every event held there has been excellent. The crowd was energetic, and Vivek appeared in a way many people had not seen before.
The Numbers Game and Republican Advantage in Ohio
This election is a numbers game. If Republicans show up even moderately, they far outnumber Democrats in Ohio. That is why Democrats know they have to stretch every process. Amy Acton is a disaster; I have said so from the beginning. She is the lockdown lady, a horrible candidate who simply does not have the goods down the stretch.[2]
In the numbers, Vivek is well ahead in the places that matter. Acton is not performing well in the counties she needs to overcome him, and those counties will not deliver the numbers required on Election Day. From conversations with people who know the internals the media does not report, the race is well in hand for Republicans if turnout materializes. That also means strength for other races on the ticket.
It is much scarier for Democrats heading into this election than for Republicans. There are simply more Republicans. But if people sit on their hands, representation can still be lost. Do not take anything for granted.
Conversations That Reveal a Dangerous Frustration
The part that concerns me most is what I heard today from people who are not deeply interested in politics—people who live between the cities, who do not know many Democrats, do not want to work with them, and have no desire to break bread with them. Their question to me was: why go vote?
Voting is the most peaceful way to maintain representative government. Their illusion is that nothing will improve until people grab guns, take violence into the streets, and reclaim the country from radicals. George Soros and others have funded efforts that damage Western civilization; evil is at work.[3] But on this election eve in 2026, I believe the best way to maintain self-government is still to vote—not to turn to violence.
Most of the people I spoke with, especially those between the cities, think it has to come to violence before they get their country back. If Democrats thought January 6 was terrible, that was mild compared with what some of these people are thinking. I try to tell them that violence can be avoided by voting. Their response is often that it will be cheated anyway, so who cares.
What’s at Stake: Civility Over Violence
What is at stake is civility itself. If you want a civil society, go vote before you feel you have to grab the guns and take it back with bloodshed the way the Revolution once required. It is yours to hold; you simply have to get up and go. You have to do it at presidential-level turnout.
After the event at Lori’s Roadhouse and the conversations I had, the picture looks strong for Republicans in Ohio if people show up. Republicans way outnumber Democrats, but if you stay home, the other side will represent you because they are the ones voting. Voting is easy. Maintaining self-government through legislative means is far better than the alternatives.
I talked to more than one person today who alluded to having a shell full of ammunition ready to “take care of” the Marxists and communists. That is not a good sign. Giving up on self-rule through the ballot is not a good thing. The other side wants people of Western civilization to abandon peaceful means. Do not give that to them.
A Personal Call to Action
I am telling everyone who watches me, reads me, or listens to me: to maintain civility and protect Western civilization, just get up and go vote. Vote for Republicans, not Democrats. Vote down tax increases. Vote for Vivek Ramaswamy. Things will be much better in Ohio with him as governor, and better in the wider world.
I remember when I first saw the campaign signs—very techie—when he was putting up the art at my business for the rally that opened his governor’s race. I am happy to see it come full circle, and I will be happy to see him as governor of Ohio.
A few months ago I saw Vivek walk into a little restaurant with almost no security. We had a nice personal conversation, and few people reacted. At Lori’s Roadhouse it was governor-level security, a Secret Service-style entourage, and a posse that made it hard to get close. It was strange, but it is exciting. I think he is going to win—but only if people show up.
Do not leave it to other people to decide for you. Vote like your life depends on it, because in a lot of ways it does. We do not want a society that turns to violence in order to maintain self-government. Go vote for the 2026 election.
Footnotes
[1] The event was held at Lori’s Roadhouse in West Chester Township, Butler County, Ohio. Local coverage and posts confirmed the rally timing on the final day of campaigning.
[2] Public polling averages in late October and early November 2026 generally showed Amy Acton with a narrow lead (roughly 2–7 points depending on the pollster), though some surveys were tighter or showed Ramaswamy ahead. Ohio does not have formal party registration; affiliation is determined by primary ballot choice. Early-voting data showed Democrats returning a higher share of ballots than Republicans through late October, with unaffiliated voters forming a large bloc. The author’s assessment relies on claimed internal numbers and county-level expectations not reflected in the public averages.
[3] References to funding of progressive causes and election-related efforts by George Soros and associated networks appear widely in conservative commentary and investigative reporting on philanthropy and political spending.
Bibliography for Further Reading
Ramaswamy, Vivek. Woke, Inc.: Inside Corporate America’s Social Justice Scam. Center Street, 2021.
Ramaswamy, Vivek. Nation of Victims: Identity Politics, the Death of Merit, and the Path Back to Excellence. Center Street, 2022.
Ramaswamy, Vivek. Capitalist Punishment: How Wall Street Is Using Your Money to Create a Country You Didn’t Vote For. HarperCollins, 2023.
Ramaswamy, Vivek. Truths: The Future of America First. Simon & Schuster, 2024.
Hoffman, Rich. The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business. (Author’s work on leadership, individual responsibility, and practical strategy.)
Green, Donald P., and Alan S. Gerber. Get Out the Vote: How to Increase Voter Turnout. 4th ed. Brookings Institution Press, 2019.
Hill, David. American Voter Turnout: An Institutional Perspective. Westview Press, 2006.
Rolfe, Meredith. Voter Turnout: A Social Theory of Political Participation. Cambridge University Press, 2012.
Derber, Charles, et al. Turnout!: Mobilizing Voters in an Emergency. Routledge, 2020.
Levitsky, Steven, and Daniel Ziblatt. How Democracies Die. Crown, 2018.
Mayer, Jane. Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right. Doubleday, 2016.
Caplan, Bryan. The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies. Princeton University Press, 2007.
Achen, Christopher H., and Larry M. Bartels. Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton University Press, 2016.
Brennan, Jason. Against Democracy. Princeton University Press, 2016.
Tocqueville, Alexis de. Democracy in America. (Multiple editions; foundational on American civic habits and self-government.)
Madison, James, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay. The Federalist Papers. (Especially essays on factions, republican government, and the dangers of majority tyranny.)
Locke, John. Second Treatise of Government. (On consent, property, and the right to alter or abolish government.)
Federalist Society publications and reports on election integrity and originalism, 2020–2026.
Heritage Foundation Election Integrity Project reports, 2024–2026.
Ohio Secretary of State voter registration and early-voting dashboards (2026 cycle data).
RealClearPolitics, Ballotpedia, and multi-state election trackers for the 2026 Ohio gubernatorial race (polling averages, candidate profiles, and historical context).
Local Ohio reporting from the Cincinnati Enquirer, Columbus Dispatch, and Butler County sources on campaign events and county-level dynamics.
Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com. If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.
In the age of disclosure, you must understand the Politics of Heaven. The administrative state has failed. It produces bureaucrats, form-fillers, and people trained to manage decline rather than fix anything. Meanwhile, the people who still know how to put a tool belt on and make something work again are the ones quietly holding the real economy together. I have learned this the hard way, across decades of executive work, competitive shooting, gunsmithing, and long hours in machine shops. The happiest version of my life has always involved tools.
A Tool Belt Full of Useful Things
I was at O’Reilly’s recently, talking with the counter guy, and he showed me a small 3/8-inch drive universal joint with a spring in it. Most of those joints flop around the moment you get them into a tight spot. This one has a spring that lets it stand up and stay put until you apply force. Titan Tools. Simple, clever, and exactly the kind of thing that makes a working day better. It went straight into the belt.
That belt already carries a telescopic magnet for fishing dropped fasteners out of engine bays and dashboards, a selection of screwdrivers, O-ring picks that actually work, a half-inch drive ratchet, and a pair of DeWalt pliers I genuinely like. The grips on the pliers are supposed to be bright yellow. They are now dark with oil and use, which is how I prefer them. There is nothing ornamental about any of it. Every item has been chosen because it solves a recurring problem.
When I strap that belt on to work on a car in the driveway, or when I used to carry one every day, the day feels correctly ordered. You have the tools you need. You can see the problem, isolate it, and correct it. That is a form of competence the administrative world almost never delivers.
Machine Shop Days and the Double-Stack Toolbox
In my late teens and early twenties I worked in a machine shop attached to a metal-stamping operation. It was a rough place. People got hurt. The work was loud, dirty, and unforgiving. They called it a “sitter” in the older language of the trade—an operation that chewed through equipment and required constant attention. I learned to set dies, make dies, troubleshoot production lines, and keep machines running. I also learned how to work alongside people who had no interest in office politics or motivational posters. They cared whether the part was good and whether the press kept cycling.
Later I refurbished old machinery for a living. We would bring in worn-out equipment, tear it down to the last nut and bolt, and rebuild it. I kept a double-stacked toolbox in the shop. In the 1990s that box held roughly a thousand dollars’ worth of tools, many of them custom or modified for specific jobs. I looked forward to work because the tools were there and the problems were concrete. When I moved into more executive roles, that daily contact with tools largely disappeared. The satisfaction did not transfer automatically to meetings and spreadsheets.
Gunsmithing, Competitive Shooting, and the Real Pleasure
Early in my marriage I set up a gunsmithing shop behind the house. I studied the craft because I wanted to work for myself and because the tools are specialized and satisfying: spring compressors, sear jigs, headspace gauges, bolt-face tools, and the particular screwdrivers and punches required for Ruger, Browning, and other actions. The guns themselves were interesting, but the tools and the process of diagnosing and correcting problems were what I enjoyed most.
Competitive fast shooting later gave me an outlet on weekends. From roughly 2018 through 2025 I shot a lot, won a lot of first-place trophies, and filled part of the office with them. The shooting itself was enjoyable—drawing, presenting, and hitting plates in a quarter or half second is a pure skill. What I came to realize, though, was that the part I looked forward to most was the workbench. Before one of the last events, in Cleveland, a gun had developed a tick. The mechanism was catching on the frame. We took the gun apart, identified the interference, and dressed it. I intended to replace the part properly once I got home. Standing there with the gun disassembled, the right tools laid out, and a clear mechanical problem in front of me, I recognized the pattern again. The shooting was the excuse. The tools and the troubleshooting were the pleasure.
Every serious competitor ends up with a small collection of specialized items: the correct bit for the screw that loosens under recoil, the fixture that holds a slide while you stone a surface, the gauge that tells you whether the timing is still correct. Building that kit, and using it under time pressure before a match, felt like the same work I had done in the machine shop decades earlier. It was crew-chief work, not spectator work.
Public Education, the Administrative Class, and What Young People Actually Need
Public education has spent decades training people to become members of the administrative bureaucracy. It has done this systematically and with considerable success. The result is a surplus of people who can navigate forms, attend meetings, and manage processes, and a shortage of people who can diagnose a hydraulic leak, set a die, pull a wiring harness, or rebuild a transmission. We talk about college as the default path while the skilled trades remain under-taught and, in many places, socially discouraged.
I have no interest in romanticizing hard physical work for its own sake. The point is narrower and more practical: a society that cannot produce and retain people who know how to fix things will not remain productive. The administrative state can write regulations. It cannot keep the machines running. When the machines stop, the regulations become irrelevant.
Young men in particular have been steered away from this path for a generation. Many of them now reach their mid-twenties without basic mechanical competence. Women notice. A man who cannot change a tire, change the oil, or diagnose a simple electrical problem is less useful as a partner and less useful as a citizen. This is not a complicated observation, and it does not require hostility toward anyone. It is simply a description of what has happened when schools stopped teaching shop, when parents stopped requiring basic mechanical literacy, and when culture began treating hands-on work as a fallback rather than a respectable primary path.
Home-improvement television and the tool aisles at places like O’Reilly’s exist for a reason. People still want to solve physical problems. The gadgets keep improving—better ratchets, magnetic trays, spring-loaded universals, compact torque wrenches, inspection cameras—because the underlying need has not gone away.
The Economic Case for the Tool Belt
The next wave of American productivity will not be led exclusively by people who write code or manage brand narratives. Space launch, electric vehicles, robotics, data-center construction, and advanced manufacturing all require large numbers of technicians who can work with tools, read drawings, troubleshoot in real time, and keep complex systems operating. Tesla-style manufacturing, reusable rocketry, and the supporting industrial base will need people who treat a tool belt as normal daily equipment rather than a costume.
Companies such as Carvana have tried to reorganize automotive retail around logistics and software. Some of those experiments will succeed in pieces; others will discover that physical goods still require physical maintenance. The firms that scale will be the ones that can recruit and retain people who already know how to use tools and who take satisfaction in the work. Those people are currently in short supply.
I am not arguing that everyone should abandon white-collar work. I am arguing that the cultural hierarchy which treats skilled trades as inferior has been a mistake, and that the economic consequences of that mistake are becoming visible. A person who can make a living with a tool belt, who owns the tools, and who looks forward to using them is in a stronger position than many people with higher formal credentials and less practical capability. The work is measurable. The customer either gets a running machine or does not. There is less room for the kind of ambiguity that administrative roles often reward.
Personal Conclusion
Across machine-shop work in my twenties, gunsmithing in the early years of marriage, competitive shooting on weekends, and the ordinary maintenance of cars and equipment at home, the pattern has been consistent. The periods in which I used tools every day were the periods I looked forward to most. Executive work has its own satisfactions and its own necessities, but it has never replaced the direct feedback of diagnosing a problem, selecting the right tool, and correcting the fault.
If a young person can learn a trade, acquire good tools, and make a living while wearing a tool belt, that person has a realistic chance at a high-quality life. The marriage, the family stability, and the personal satisfaction tend to follow the competence rather than the other way around. Public education has spent too many years teaching the opposite lesson. The correction will not come from another round of administrative reforms. It will come from people who simply decide to learn how to fix things and who refuse to treat that skill as second-class.
The future economy will reward them. In the meantime, a well-stocked tool belt remains one of the more reliable sources of ordinary happiness available.
Footnotes
1. The spring-loaded 3/8-inch universal joint is a small but representative example of incremental tool improvement. Older flex-joint designs required constant manual positioning; the spring returns the joint to a usable attitude, reducing frustration in confined spaces.
2. “Sitter” was shop-floor language for certain stamping or forming operations that demanded continuous operator or maintenance attention because of wear rates, material variability, or tooling sensitivity. Injury rates in older metal-stamping environments were high by modern standards.
3. The double-stacked toolbox from the 1990s refurbishing work contained both standard and job-specific tooling. Custom ground punches, modified wrenches, and dedicated fixtures were common because production machinery of that era was not designed for rapid field service.
4. Competitive practical shooting requires ongoing gunsmith-level maintenance. Recoil, fouling, and high round counts loosen fasteners, alter timing, and reveal small dimensional problems that range guns rarely expose. Most serious competitors maintain a traveling tool kit for exactly this reason.
5. Matthew B. Crawford’s Shop Class as Soulcraft (2009) remains one of the clearer modern arguments that manual competence produces a distinct form of cognitive and moral satisfaction largely absent from many administrative and symbolic-analytic jobs.
6. Public high-school shop programs declined sharply after the 1970s–1980s in most U.S. districts. The shift coincided with rising college-enrollment targets and a cultural redefinition of “good” jobs as those requiring bachelor’s degrees. Skilled-trade shortages in construction, manufacturing maintenance, and automotive repair have been widely documented since the mid-2010s.
7. Basic mechanical literacy (tire changes, oil changes, simple electrical diagnosis, plumbing and electrical fundamentals) functions as a practical filter in household and community life. Its absence is frequently noted in discussions of partner selection and household stability, independent of broader ideological framing.
8. Advanced manufacturing, commercial space, electric-vehicle production, and data-center build-out all increase demand for technicians who combine traditional mechanical skills with newer diagnostic tools (thermal imaging, borescopes, precision torque, digital multimeters, and basic programmable-logic troubleshooting). The tool belt evolves; it does not disappear.
Bibliography & Further Reading
• Hoffman, Rich. The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business. (Personal framework connecting competitive shooting, tool use, executive decision-making, and individual agency.)
• Crawford, Matthew B. Shop Class as Soulcraft: An Inquiry into the Value of Work. Penguin, 2009.
• Rowe, Mike. Profoundly Disconnected (various essays and talks on skilled trades and cultural attitudes toward manual work).
• Pirsig, Robert M. Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. (Classic exploration of quality, tools, and the relationship between mechanic and machine.)
• Sennett, Richard. The Craftsman. Yale University Press, 2008.
• Industry reporting on skilled-trade shortages: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics occupational outlooks for industrial machinery mechanics, automotive technicians, electricians, and millwrights (ongoing).
• Historical context on the decline of vocational education: various state and federal reports from the 1980s–2000s documenting the reduction of shop programs in public secondary schools.
The tools remain available. The work remains necessary. The satisfaction, for those willing to acquire the skill, has not been repealed by any administrative decree.
Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com. If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.
I have been talking about this for years now, and the pattern keeps confirming itself. A few years ago, in 2022, it was Cochise County, Arizona, with Katie Hobbs as Secretary of State. Republican supervisors on the board delayed certifying the midterm results past the statutory deadline, citing concerns about the certification and accreditation of the voting machines. Hobbs, who was herself a candidate for governor against Kari Lake, sued the county to force the canvass. A judge ordered them to certify; they eventually did under threat, and later two supervisors were indicted for interference. Official accounts insist there was “no evidence of a count being incorrect,” yet the resistance itself, the attempted full hand-count that a court blocked, and the broader atmosphere of machine distrust revealed how thin the institutional trust had become.
We have seen the same dynamic in Fulton County, Georgia. In December 2025, an attorney for the county stood before the State Election Board and stated plainly that they did not dispute the failure to sign tabulator tapes covering roughly 315,000 early votes from the 2020 election—nearly all of the early in-person ballots. That directly violates the rules designed to create a verifiable chain of custody between voters and tabulated results. There have also been admissions and findings around double-scanned ballots, missing ballot images, and inconsistent batch tallies from the risk-limiting audit and recount. Officials and the Secretary of State call these clerical errors that did not change the outcome; Biden’s margin in Georgia was about 11,779 votes. Yet the volume of procedural failures is not trivial, and the late admission years later only feeds the original skepticism.
How They Thought They Would Get Away With It
This is what has always puzzled me. The Constitution and American society rest on a baseline of integrity—people raising their right hand and swearing to tell the whole truth, so help them, God. When that idea is hollowed out, the entire mechanism of voluntary cooperation collapses. Progressive globalism treated the removal of that integrity as a feature, not a bug. Without the sacred weight of the oath, testimony becomes just another tactical instrument. You can say whatever advances the narrative today and walk it back tomorrow as a “clerical error.” The goal was authority without the restraint of genuine accountability.
They preached using the power of government to reshape the individual and society, yet simultaneously pushed to defund the police. That is an obvious contradiction. If you dismantle the everyday instruments of law and order, how exactly do you intend to enforce the new authority you claim? You cannot have it both ways. Either the rules apply with consistent enforcement, or the system becomes pure power exercised by whoever controls the institutions at the moment. The progressive assumption seemed to be that once integrity was sufficiently degraded, and once enough people accepted that “the process” itself was the only legitimacy required, dissent could be managed through narrative, lawfare, and selective prosecution rather than persuasion.
Lawfare, Oaths, and the Targeting of Questioners
We saw that approach in practice. Efforts to put Trump in jail; the imprisonment of Peter Navarro for contempt of Congress related to the January 6 committee and election-related challenges; and the FBI seizure of Mike Lindell’s phone at a drive-through while he was under heavy scrutiny for questioning the machines and the results—these were not abstract debates. They showed what happens when you question the official story too persistently. At the same time, discussions continue about holding figures such as Anthony Fauci accountable for the pandemic response, yet the institutional machinery has been far more energetic in pursuing those who challenged 2020 election procedures than in applying the same standard universally.
The removal of the idea that an oath means something is central. When liberals treat the “so help me God” clause as optional theater, the entire structure of testimony and public record loses its force. That is why a candidate like Amy Acton can run for governor in Ohio with a campaign largely managed through public relations filters, raising tens of millions while avoiding direct, unscripted answers to difficult questions. The model is to control the information environment rather than submit to open scrutiny. In a system that still had robust integrity, that approach would be fatal. Once integrity is optional, it becomes a viable strategy.
The Voice of the People and the 2024 Contrast
People still went out and voted in large numbers in 2024. The red wave, though it could not be fully contained, showed that when voters have a clear channel and counting is sufficiently visible, the representative mechanism can still function. That is why calls to re-examine 2020—not as nostalgia, but as a demand that discrepancies be treated with the same seriousness as any other large-scale administrative failure—continue. Trump didn’t have to be drafted into that fight; he volunteered because the alternative was accepting a system in which the oath and the count are both flexible. It was never more complicated than that for those who still believe the mechanisms they were told were reliable should actually be reliable.
The progressive error was thinking that authority could be sustained after integrity had been systematically weakened. Without the cultural habit of telling the truth under oath, and without consistent law enforcement that does not depend on political convenience, the only remaining tools are narrative control and selective coercion. That is not a stable foundation for any society that claims to be constitutional. The admissions in places like Fulton County and the certification fights in Cochise County are not the whole story, but they clearly illustrate why so many people concluded the system had stopped treating integrity as non-negotiable.
Bibliography
• New York Times, “Republican-Controlled County in Arizona Holds Up Election Results,” November 28, 2022.
• Snopes, “Fulton County, Georgia, officials admitted ballot-handling errors during 2020 election,” December 2025 (citing State Election Board proceedings and county attorney Ann Brumbaugh’s statement).
• Atlanta News First and 11Alive reporting on the December 9, 2025, State Election Board hearing regarding unsigned tabulator tapes covering approximately 315,000 early votes.
• Associated Press and other contemporaneous coverage of Cochise County Board of Supervisors actions, Hobbs lawsuit, and subsequent judicial order to certify.
• Judicial Watch and reporting on the 2022 FBI warrant and seizure of Mike Lindell’s phone.
• Coverage of Peter Navarro’s conviction and imprisonment for contempt of Congress.
• Acton for Governor campaign finance announcements and contemporaneous polling.porting on the 2026 Ohio gubernatorial race.The record is public.
Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com. If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.
Yesterday morning, while most of America was still arguing about whether you are allowed to notice patterns, Flydubai Flight FZ1073 left Dubai for Tel Aviv with roughly 174 people on board, almost all of them Israeli. Somewhere over the route, the Omani co-pilot stabbed the Indian captain, Smit Machchhar, and the Boeing 737 MAX dropped about 17,000 feet in under two minutes. Passengers broke into the cockpit. One of them put the attacker in a chokehold. Off-duty pilots landed the airplane in Tabuk, Saudi Arabia. Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel Katz called it an attempted jihadist attack. A fellow pilot told Israeli television the co-pilot prayed excessively and refused to shake hands with women. Saudi authorities are still questioning him. Trump said he might have been a terrorist or he might have been mentally ill. That is the news cycle. What follows is the argument underneath it.
I have my copy of the Quran. I have carried a flexible edition for years so I can argue with it instead of about it. I also have my Jonathan Edwards study Bible open on the desk. Edwards died in 1758, before there was a United States. He already knew the problem. He called the two great works of the devil against the kingdom of Christ the papal kingdom in the West and the Mahometan kingdom in the East. He said Muhammad was a subtle, crafty man who pretended the Alcoran came from Gabriel, sold a sensual paradise, and propagated the religion by the sword. That is a Northampton pastor in the 1750s, not a 2026 invention.
What the Word Actually Means
Islam means submission. Not peace in the Hallmark sense. The whole system is built around total submission to Allah and to the law derived from Muhammad. Anybody who does not have submission in the vocabulary is already in trouble with the text.
That is why the political class is comfortable with it. A religion that trains people to bend the knee to an authority they are not allowed to question is useful to people who want the same habit pointed at the state. If you will not submit to the God of the Quran, the substitute arrives quickly: submit to the bureau, the school board, the speech code. Historically the faith has almost never traveled as private piety. It has traveled with a political order attached — dhimmi status, tribute, second-class standing for those who will not convert, and expansion when the numbers allow it.
I can sit at a drinking fountain with a Muslim coworker and talk about anything. I joke with them. Why are you praying toward Mecca on a cloth at a set hour? They can tell me to read the Quran. I can tell them to read the Bible. We can still shake hands and walk away. That is ordinary human contact. It is not the same thing as pretending the systems are compatible. The insecurity shows up the moment you decline to submit. Then you are the enemy. Gentle people exist inside every population. The doctrine is still the doctrine.
Edwards, Before We Had a Country
If I could put Edwards in the chair, the question would be simple. What do you think of planting the Quran in the life of a nation that still claims the gospel?
The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob revealed his Son. The Quran speaks of God and denies the eternal sonship of Christ and his death upon the cross. That is a false gospel. It leads away from the only name under heaven by which men must be saved. To implement that book as a peer authority in the public life of a nation is to invite spiritual darkness onto ground already cracking under its own weight. A house divided against itself cannot stand. A people who try to honor both light and darkness will perish.
From a 1750s seat, the attempt looks like division by design. It flatters the pride of man — one God, no mediator, no scandal of the cross — while denying the Savior. A nation cannot serve two masters. It cannot honor the cross and the crescent and stay one thing. Edwards thought God would not share his glory with another. I think he was right.
Same Names, Opposite Message
Adam is in the Quran. Moses is in there. Abraham is in there. Jesus is in there as a prophet who was not crucified and is not the Son. That is spiritual plagiarism. You take the names to borrow trust, then you twist the load-bearing walls to have a strategic meaning meant to destroy Western Civilization at the ground level.
The fork in the road is the sacrifice. In Genesis the son on the mountain is Isaac, the child of the covenant marriage. In the Islamic telling the favored line runs through Ishmael, the son of Hagar, outside that marriage. That rebuilds the family tree so the covenant son is no longer the covenant son. From the first chapter of the argument, Islam is set against Israel. A religion that elevates the son who was not the child of the covenant, and then asks the world to treat that reversal as revelation, is telling you something about the spirit behind the text.
Muhammad was a merchant in a region that wanted its older habits back under a new umbrella, aimed at the Christian order in the eastern Roman world. Something came and talked to him. That does not make a man great. The traditional account is roughly twenty-three years of recitation. The thing calling itself Gabriel contradicted what the Gospels say Gabriel announced to Mary six centuries earlier. Angels do not spend two decades canceling a message they already delivered. One of them was not Gabriel. The Bible tells you to test the spirits. He submitted instead.
Who Lets the Adversary Run?
People ask why Jesus lets the adversary operate. I have heard the real-estate version: a transaction in the garden, a deed, Satan as a squatter with papers. I do not think God lost the earth. Sovereignty over creation was not handed away. What was permitted was influence over human beings who chose the lie. The patience is not incompetence. Evil is allowed so that justice and mercy can both be seen when the thing is finally crushed.
That patience is expensive. Innocent people die. The biblical claim is that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked and waits because he is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. The end of the patience will be worse than the middle of it. You can hate the cost and still see why a God who intends to save refuses to end the offer early. What you cannot do is confuse that patience with approval of a rival gospel.
The Black Stone and the Unasked Question
A billion and a half people circle a stone, touch it, kiss it, and cannot tell you where it came from. Pre-Islamic practice, rebranded. Kissing a stone the stranger ahead of you just kissed is not profound. It is submission performed so that nobody has to ask. Where did the rock come from? Why these characters were borrowed from the Bible? Why is the Christology reversed? Why is criticism of Muhammad blasphemy while criticism of the church is a Tuesday?
Truth does not need a threat to survive examination. A lie does. Revelation 22:18–19 warns against adding to or taking away from the words of that prophecy. It is a seal on a book, not a police regime. The habit of the New Testament is to test everything. The habit of the other book is submit and be quiet, from the first surah to the last.
Joseph Campbell bothered me on this point. When he spoke of Gabriel appearing to Muhammad, he softened it. He wanted to stay employed at Sarah Lawrence and keep the editing work which I always thought was dishonest, intellectually. He knew better. Polite academia already had a tribute system. That pressure is worse now. It is not scholarship. It is submission with a faculty ID.
Speech Is the Battlefield They Prefer
Everyone looks for Turks at the gates. The cheaper conquest is speech. You submit in what you are allowed to say to your wife, your kids, your readers. You do not ask where the stone came from.
The radical left has spent years introducing Islamic institutional power into a culture built on the Bible, English law, and the conscience of the individual. The ideas are not compatible. A system whose end state is Islamic rule, with non-Muslims as tolerated subordinates, cannot live as a permanent equal inside a republic that treats religions as voluntary associations under a civil law nobody gets to replace. The useful idiots think they can aim this at the church and then manage the aftermath. Every civilization that tried that partnership was wrong. What a lot of people don’t say about Iran is that their government is the goal of those attacking America. That’s what is expected of us and Islam is the entry point to that kind of blind totalitarian rule. That’s why destroying Iran was important for the Trump administration. It had to happen to break the spell.
Yesterday’s cockpit is the unpolite version of the same pressure. The Crusades were a late reaction to centuries of conquest, not the opening move. The argument was never settled. It changed vehicles.
Two Things Worth Keeping
Islam means submission, by whatever method gets the knee bent: fear, law, shame, the sword, the human-resources office. And the religion took shape in the seventh century as a rival system in the borderlands of the Roman East, borrowing names, reversing the covenant son, denying the cross, and requiring a submission Christianity does not require. That ambition did not retire. If you cannot find the authority inside the religious layer, look at the next layer up. Government is always happy to become the thing you submit to.
The pilot who opened the cockpit door while he was bleeding did not submit. Neither should we.
Footnotes and the bibliography — Edwards’s History of the Work of Redemption, the Miscellanies, McDermott, Ibn Ishaq, Bat Ye’or, Genesis 16–22, Revelation 22:18–19, and the 30 September wire copy from BBC, Reuters, Times of Israel, and PBS
Notes
1. Keir Starmer, 26 September 2025, announcing the digital-ID scheme: “You will not be able to work in the United Kingdom if you do not have digital ID. It’s as simple as that.” BBC, “New digital ID will be mandatory to work in the UK,” 26 September 2025; BBC explainer, updated 23 October 2025. Darren Jones called a working system “the bedrock of the modern state.” A petition to scrap the scheme approached three million signatures.
2. The scheme was described as an app on the phone, carrying name, date of birth, nationality or residency status, and a photograph, mandatory for proving the right to work by the end of the Parliament (no later than August 2029), not required to be carried, and not retrospective for people already in a job. BBC, 23 October 2025.
3. On 14 January 2026 the Telegraph reported that Labour had dropped compulsory digital ID for right-to-work checks, describing it as the eleventh U-turn, while sources still spoke of mandatory digital checks as distinct from a compulsory card. The September sentence remains the clearest statement of intent.
4. U.S. “right to work” statutes bar compulsory union membership or dues as a condition of employment. Indiana is a right-to-work state; Ohio is not. The British phrase in Starmer’s announcement means the opposite: state permission as a condition of employment.
5. Amy Acton was director of the Ohio Department of Health during the 2020 orders. Subsequent litigation tested those orders against the Ohio Constitution. The employer-side account here is mine, from operating through the orders while those cases were being built.
6. Applicant-tracking systems and automated résumé screens are standard in large U.S. firms. The disparate-impact and DEI sorting layered on those systems expanded after 2020 and has been contested in federal policy since 2025. My 2026 job search is the field report; it is not a national census.
7. Real ID and passport-level identity checks for employment eligibility (Form I-9, E-Verify) tightened the document set employers will accept. I was required to produce a passport repeatedly in 2026 hiring processes.
8. BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard are the dominant U.S. index complexes. Their proxy and ESG policies in the early 2020s were a transmission belt from asset-manager politics into corporate HR. Political and legal pushback since 2023 has narrowed, not ended, that belt.
9. Vinyl’s return is a measured market, not a metaphor only. RIAA data through the mid-2020s show vinyl as the majority of physical music revenue, driven by ownership rather than by audio quality. The Cracker Barrel gift-shop scene is mine, with my grandsons.
10. Jonathan Edwards, A History of the Work of Redemption, on the papal and Mahometan kingdoms as the two great rival orders that swallowed the Roman world.
11. Socialist International membership and the historic sympathies of Western socialist parties for the Cuban revolution and for Central American insurgencies are a matter of public record. Canada’s and Mexico’s governing models are social-democratic and corporatist respectively; neither is a classical liberal republic.
Bibliography
BBC News. “New digital ID will be mandatory to work in the UK.” 26 September 2025.
BBC News. “What are digital ID cards, how will they work and will they be mandatory?” Updated 23 October 2025.
BBC News. “No digital ID checks until you change jobs, says No 10.” 23 October 2025.
Burnham, James. The Managerial Revolution. New York: John Day, 1941.
Edwards, Jonathan. A History of the Work of Redemption. In The Works of Jonathan Edwards, vol. 9, edited by John F. Wilson. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989.
Friedman, Milton. Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.
Hayek, F. A. The Road to Serfdom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1944.
Hoffman, Rich. The Politics of Heaven. Manuscript, completed 2026; publication targeted 2027.
Mises, Ludwig von. Bureaucracy. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1944.
Mises, Ludwig von. Socialism. 1922. English edition, Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
Murray, Charles. Human Diversity: The Biology of Gender, Race, and Class. New York: Twelve, 2020.
Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com. If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.
A Community Night at Miami University’s Innovation Center
On September 21, 2026, we hosted a special community event at Miami University’s Innovation Center on Elm Street in Oxford, Ohio.
We called the evening “Dreams on Elm Street”, a lighthearted nod to the classic 1980s film. But what we’re building at Volynt isn’t the stuff of nightmares. It’s the realization of a dream, one that is taking shape right here in Butler County and has the potential to transform the future of logistics, aviation, and economic development in Ohio.
The turnout exceeded our expectations. The room was filled with Miami University staff, students, local business leaders, elected officials, and community members who wanted to learn more about what Volynt is building and where we’re headed.
We were honored to welcome Senator George Lang, Butler County Auditor Nancy Nix, and Michael Ryan, who is poised to become Butler County’s next commissioner. Their presence reflected the growing enthusiasm for innovation, entrepreneurship, and advanced aerospace development in our region.
Sharing the Vision
I opened the evening by welcoming our guests and providing an overview of the event. From there, our leadership team took the stage.
Our CEO shared Volynt’s long-term vision and mission. Our Chief Technology Officer highlighted the engineering milestones we’ve achieved and the technology behind the Volynt Vyper platform. As Chief Operating Officer, I discussed how Volynt is transforming cutting-edge aviation technology into a scalable and sustainable business. I outlined our operational strategy, manufacturing roadmap, partnerships, and the steps required to move from prototype development to commercial deployment.
The presentations were engaging, the audience was attentive, and the questions that followed demonstrated genuine interest and excitement.
Most importantly, this wasn’t a flashy product launch filled with unrealistic promises. It was an honest conversation about where we are today, what we’ve accomplished, and what the next several years may hold.
From Prototype to Production
Our immediate focus is straightforward.
Over the next six months, our team will complete the full-scale Vyper prototype that was unveiled at the Innovation Center. That aircraft represents years of design work, engineering refinement, and determination.
Once completed, the aircraft will enter an intensive testing phase designed to validate performance, reliability, and operational capabilities.
Looking ahead to 2027, we plan to participate in major industry competitions, build broader recognition within the aerospace community, and begin manufacturing multiple aircraft.
The goals are ambitious, but they are supported by a clear roadmap and a dedicated team committed to execution.
The Drone Revolution Is Already Here
One of the most important messages of the evening was that autonomous aviation is no longer a future concept.
It’s happening today.
Just one day after our event, Dayton-area company Dexa launched a drone delivery service in Kettering. The program delivers food orders from TJ Chumps on East Stroop Road to customers within a several-mile radius across Kettering, Oakwood, and Centerville.
These smaller drones operate as last-mile delivery systems. Flying at approximately 400 feet, they lower food orders safely to customers using a cable-delivery system. Dexa has spent years developing this capability and is helping demonstrate that drone delivery is becoming a practical reality.
Volynt’s mission is different.
While companies like Dexa focus on last-mile delivery, Volynt is developing larger autonomous aircraft designed for middle-mile logistics. Our aircraft are intended to transport meaningful payloads between regional hubs such as Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport (CVG), Dayton International Airport, Indianapolis, and other distribution centers.
This approach has the potential to reduce transportation bottlenecks, address driver shortages, and create more efficient supply chains.
Whether it’s delivering a meal across town or transporting freight across a region, autonomous aviation is rapidly reshaping how goods move through our economy.
Why Ohio Is Positioned to Lead
Ohio’s aviation legacy is unmatched.
The birthplace of powered flight now has an opportunity to become a leader in autonomous flight.
Few regions are better positioned than Butler County to participate in that transformation.
Our region offers access to multiple airports, including Miami University’s airport, where initial flight operations can be conducted. At the same time, substantial investment continues at Butler County Regional Airport, where significant infrastructure improvements are being planned.
The resources, workforce, educational institutions, and transportation network already exist. What remains is bringing together the innovators, investors, and community leaders who can turn opportunity into reality.
Creating Careers That Stay Close to Home
One topic that resonates deeply with me is talent retention.
I have spoken with countless parents who have made tremendous sacrifices to provide educational opportunities for their children through Miami University, Butler Tech, and the University of Cincinnati. Too often, those graduates leave Ohio because they believe the best opportunities are elsewhere.
That reality creates a challenge for families and communities alike.
One of our long-term goals at Volynt is to help change that story.
We envision creating thousands of high-quality aerospace, engineering, technology, and manufacturing jobs throughout Southern Ohio. We want talented young people to have the option of building exciting, fulfilling careers without leaving their families, communities, and hometowns behind.
Strong Community Support
One of the most encouraging moments of the evening was seeing the level of support from the community.
Michael Ryan delivered an excellent presentation about economic development in Butler County and how innovative companies such as Volynt can contribute to future growth and prosperity.
The participation from Miami University, local leaders, educators, students, business professionals, and community members reinforced something I’ve believed from the beginning:
Innovation succeeds when communities embrace it.
Dreams on Elm Street was more than a company presentation. It was a milestone. It brought together people from different backgrounds and perspectives to discuss a shared vision for the future of our region.
The energy in the room was unmistakable. The conversations were thoughtful. The questions were insightful. The enthusiasm was genuine.
For me, that confirmed that we’re moving in the right direction.
Looking Ahead
Volynt’s journey is still in its early chapters.
There is much work ahead, many challenges to overcome, and numerous milestones still to achieve. But the momentum is real, and the opportunities are significant.
We will continue sharing updates with the community as we progress from prototype development to testing, certification, manufacturing, and beyond.
This is only the beginning.
Thank you to everyone who attended Dreams on Elm Street and supported our mission. Your encouragement and belief in what we’re building means more than you know.
Together, we’re not just dreaming about the future.
We’re building it.
About the Author
Rich Hoffman is Chief Operating Officer of Volynt, where he leads operational strategy, business development, manufacturing planning, and growth initiatives for the company’s autonomous aerospace programs. A longtime Butler County leader and aerospace executive, he is committed to building high-quality technology careers and advancing innovation throughout Southwest Ohio.
Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com. If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.
Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com. If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.
I cannot say enough about the new Jonathan Edwards Study Bible. It landed in August 2026, an NKJV built around the mind of the man I have come to think of as the theologian of American courage. The notes are not decorative. They are sermons, resolutions, doctrinal bone, and the working method of a man who wrote as if ideas had consequences because they do.[1]
I say that as a reader, not as a salesman. Somebody asked me if I work for the publisher because I will not shut up about it. I do not. I want them to make money. Scholars spent years—some of them a couple of decades—compressing Edwards into a book you can carry. That labor has to eat. It has to buy a hamburger. It has to justify itself in a market or it dies in a seminar. Paul would have understood that sentence immediately.
Every time I get a new Bible and read it through a different set of notes, my angle shifts a few degrees. This time the shift was violent. I could not stop thinking what a miracle it is that the crucifixion was even reported, and what a second miracle it is that Christianity became a civilization instead of a rumor. I want to talk about Christianity as a military and commercial endeavor—not instead of a spiritual one, but because the spiritual claim had to survive contact with Rome, with human nature, and with time.
I would say the benefit of Christianity to the human race, and to Western civilization in particular, was magnificent. That is not nostalgia. That is an audit. And the audit keeps returning to one man who began as an enemy.
The Road to Damascus Was a Hostile Takeover
The most important conversion story in history is not a soft altar call. Saul of Tarsus was hunting the church. Then he was its most formidable champion. The turn on the Damascus road is personal, traumatic, and public all at once.[2] I think a lot of people live in that same weather: against the thing, then claimed by the thing, then unable to go back to the person they were.
Paul was not a fisherman. He was a trained Pharisee and a working tradesman, a tentmaker who could pay his own way.[3] That combination is the whole essay in miniature. He had letters and leather. He could argue with philosophers in Athens and stitch a living in Corinth. The original disciples had seen Jesus with their own eyes. Paul had seen the risen Christ in a different register, and he had a skill the others did not: he knew how to take a local fire and turn it into a network.
People like to romanticize the Jerusalem church in Acts, where believers held things in common. I look at that scene and I do not see a manifesto. I see a threatened family taking care of its own. Historians, when they are being honest, generally read it as voluntary generosity inside a persecuted community—not a planned economy, not a party platform, and not a model Paul exported as law.[4] Later ideologies would loot the language. That is what ideologies do. They steal the family table and call it a theory.
The Jerusalem group was not trying to invent socialism. They were trying not to die, and they were trying not to abandon widows. The arrangement did not become the operating system of the Gentile churches. Paul would not have let it. He was too busy building congregations that could stand on their own feet in cities that did not care whether they lived.
Why the Original Apostles Could Not Have Done Paul’s Job
I love the apostles. I do not confuse their calling with Paul’s. They were rooted in Jerusalem, preaching first to their own people. Their courage was the courage of witnesses. Several of them were poor. They put the emphasis on the message and on the willingness to be spent. Rome knew what to do with men like that. It crucified them, beheaded them, scattered them. We remember them because the record survived. Memory is not the same thing as scale.[5]
Paul fought with them. That fact is in the Bible, not in some cynical footnote I invented. He opposed Peter to his face when the Gentile question threatened to split the movement into a Jewish remnant and a half-welcome underclass.[6] Christianity did not lock arms and sing. It argued. It almost broke. The argument was about purity versus reach, table fellowship versus the map of the empire. Paul chose the map.
Without that fight, I do not think you get a world religion. You get a Jewish faction with a crucified Messiah and a short half-life. Rome was full of such groups. We do not know their names because they lost.[7]
John survived. Tradition says they tried to boil him and failed, then parked him on Patmos, where he wrote Revelation.[8] Paul did not survive. The usual account is execution in Rome under Nero, sometime in the mid-sixties.[9] People mix Paul and John the way they mix founders and finishers. Revelation is a vision of the end. Ephesians is a field manual for a people who have to live until the end. I need both. I do not pretend they are the same book.
The Tentmaker Advantage: Financial Independence as Spiritual Nerve
Here is the part church-language usually sands off. Paul could be bold because he was not living off the room. He reserved the right to refuse a paycheck from the very people he served so that no one could say he was selling them a product.[10] That is not pride. That is strategy. A man who can feed himself can say the thing that gets him uninvited.
I have watched too many movements collapse into client relationships. The preacher needs the donor. The donor needs the preacher to bless the donor. Pretty soon nobody will say the costly sentence. The original disciples, as I read them, were often one arrest away from disappearing. Their deaths were holy. They were also, in organizational terms, a warning. Martyrdom proves sincerity. It does not automatically prove succession.
Paul’s independence gave him latitude. He could travel. He could offend. He could plant and leave and write back when the plant started growing weeds. He could walk into a city as a man with a trade rather than as a dependent mystic. I think that is why his version of the faith could cross from synagogue to workshop to household to the imperial road system. He understood customers. I do not mean he cheapened the gospel. I mean he knew that people must be able to receive a thing, carry a thing, and organize their lives around a thing—or the thing remains a speech in an alley.
If you want to know why I keep calling Paul a businessman, that is why. Not because he maximized profit. Because he understood value, timing, distribution, and the difference between a local hero and a transferable institution.
What Ephesians Actually Does
Ephesians is my favorite book in the Bible. It is short enough to carry and large enough to rebuild a mind. Paul does not wander. He frames the whole Christian movement: what God did before the foundation of the world, what Christ did in history, what the church is as a body, how a household should run, and how a believer is supposed to stand when the visible world is not the real battlefield.
The line that will not let me go is Ephesians 6:12. We do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.[11] I have come to think that verse is one of the most adult sentences ever written. It is what a person says after he has stopped believing that the problem is merely the neighbor’s personality.
Scholars argue over whether Paul meant demons, institutions, cosmic beings, or the spiritual charge inside empires and customs. I think he meant the whole weather system.[12] Names on mailboxes are not nothing. They are not the war. The war is the thing that climbs into names and makes them march.
That is why Ephesians could travel. It is theology you can use in Ephesus, Corinth, a Pennsylvania fort, a civil-war cemetery, or a county Republican breakfast. It tells a church how to live without becoming a cult and how to fight without mistaking people for the enemy. Paul called that arrangement a mystery revealed: Gentiles as fellow heirs, not guests in someone else’s religion.[13] That is scale. That is the business decision at the heart of the New Testament.
Flesh, Blood, and What I See in a Granddaughter
I have a young granddaughter. I watch her learn to walk, grab, flinch, laugh, and decide which faces matter. She is writing relationships into her nervous system that will still be there when she is fifty—parents, uncles, cousins, the strange country of grandparents. That is the human miracle and it is also the trap. We become so fascinated by whose nose she inherited that we forget to ask the older question.
What was she before she was a body? What is the spiritual essence that is using this little frame to enter the world? I do not mean that as a greeting-card. I mean it as politics. Paul called the hidden agents principalities. I have arrived at the same word by the long road of watching people. I am bad at names. People notice. They think I am careless. I am not careless about the thing I think is actually driving the name. Tim, Bob, Bill—fine. I want to know what climbed into Tim.
I do not get very excited about fleshly pursuits. I care about the politics of the powers that wear bodies like coats. That sounds cold until you have watched good people hurt each other while insisting they are only being practical. Paul’s sentence explains the pattern. The pattern is older than the persons.
This is also why the incarnation is not a sentimental Christmas pageant to me. If the real problem were only human manners, God could have sent another list. The Old Testament is not shy about the Spirit of God coming upon men. The scandal is that God himself takes flesh and walks into the mess. I think that is because human beings are not, at bottom, the main antagonist. The forces that use human beings are. Meeting us in the middle of the mess was not a branding exercise. It was an invasion.
When Does a Life Begin If the War Began Earlier?
I will not pretend this next piece is a public-policy white paper. It is the metaphysical question hiding under the abortion argument, and most of the argument never reaches it. The usual fight is: when does the fetus become human enough? Conception, heartbeat, viability, birth, one day before birth. Those are body questions. They matter. They are not the last questions.
Paul’s principalities force a harder timing problem. When does the spiritual being begin its journey in this world? I think the powers are already at work when a man and a woman find themselves wanting to form a union that could produce a child. They are either willing a life into the world or leaning the world toward demolition. Political systems, in my view, are the large, clumsy mirrors of that same contest. We build governments the way we build families: as flesh-and-blood answers to a conflict we can barely see.
If that is true, then a culture that talks only about bodies will keep losing to a culture that understands appetite, despair, and the unseen pressure on the will. I am not asking the county health department to adopt a demonology. I am asking Christians to stop acting as if Ephesians 6:12 were poetry.
What Christianity Gave the West
I said the gift was magnificent. Let me be specific enough to be attacked.
Christianity took a Mediterranean world that exposed unwanted infants, ranked souls by pedigree, and treated crucifixion as interior decorating for highways, and it taught that world that the weak had a claim on the strong. It made the person, not the clan, the unit of moral concern. It made conscience a public fact. It made time itself a story with a judgment at the end, which is another way of saying it made history matter.[14][15]
That moral architecture did not fall out of the sky in 1776. It was preached, copied, argued, and institutionalized for centuries before any Virginian wrote a declaration. Even secular historians who cannot recite the catechism now admit they are living inside the blast radius.[16] You can hate the church and still be using its furniture. Most modern humanitarian language is Christian language with the serial numbers filed off.
I do not say this because I think Christians have always behaved like saints. They have not. I say it because the standard by which we condemn their failures is itself a Christian standard. Rome did not accuse itself of failing the least of these. We do. That habit had to be invented.[17][18]
Jonathan Edwards and the American Nerve
If Paul is how the faith left Palestine, Edwards is one of the reasons it grew a backbone in English-speaking America. He is remembered, lazily, for one terrifying sermon in Enfield in 1741.[19] That sermon is real. It is also a fragment. Edwards was after joy in God, the nature of true affection, the freedom and bondage of the will, and a revival that would not fake itself.[20]
The First Great Awakening gave the colonies a shared moral language before they had a shared government. It taught ordinary people that authority could be wrong, that the soul had business with God that no bishop or parliament could intercept, and that history was not a closed room.[21] Calvin Coolidge, who is not usually cast as a revivalist, said Edwards’s philosophy had prepared the colonists for the Declaration.[22] That is a president talking, not a youth-group brochure.
I do not think America exists in the form I care about without that fire. I also do not think Edwards was sitting in Northampton in the 1740s designing the United States. Influence is a cascade, not a conspiracy. Edwards shapes a climate. The climate shapes men who never met him. The men walk onto battlefields and into conventions carrying instincts they think are simply common sense.[23][24]
His written corpus is enormous. Yale has spent generations editing it. The new study Bible is the first time a lot of ordinary readers will feel that weight without needing a research library card.[25]
Fort Necessity: The Wrong Turn That Organized My Year
My wife and I were trying to get toward Washington. We missed a turn, dropped onto the National Road with a camper that does not enjoy mountain switchbacks, and kept going because turning around had become a theology problem of its own. We pulled into Fort Necessity because the parking lot was large enough for me to get a Mello Yello out of our camper refrigerator.[26]
We were early. It was a midweek afternoon, still cold, almost empty. I went back to the refrigerator for my Mello Yello, which is as close as I get to a sacrament on the road, and we walked the ground. Young Washington was here. He built a sad little circular fort in a meadow and lost. That loss did not make him small. It started the education of the man who would refuse a crown.
I did not hear an audible voice. I am not going to insult the place by inventing one. What I did get was an obsession. The same year I stood at Fort Necessity I stood at Washington’s grave at Mount Vernon and in the room where he slept.
A few months later the Washington film made the circuit and we went. I liked it. But the question it could not answer for me was the one the field had already asked: what made Washington Washington? I think part of the answer is upstream of muskets. It is the Awakening’s idea that a people can be morally addressed as a people—that rebellion against a corrupt center might be obedience to a higher one.[27]
A phone call in the bookstore
While I was in the Fort Necessity bookstore, Nancy Nix called. She and I do local Republican work in Butler County, Ohio. We do not live on the phone. We think in the same direction often enough that when something is jammed, we say so and talk it out. She was dealing with the eternal problem of twenty-five people in a room who will not share a sandbox well together. I was surrounded by Washingtoniana. The juxtaposition was perfect. The early church had the same meeting. Paul had the same meeting. Scale always produces factions. The work is not to pretend otherwise. The work is to keep the factions from killing the thing they claim to love.
Ford’s Theatre, Gettysburg, and the Men Who Paid the Invoice
We did Washington properly. We stood outside the White House. That same day we went to Ford’s Theatre. I had already had enough of John Wilkes Booth by the time I looked at the box Lincoln was shot in. I was hungry. I wanted a sandwich and a quieter mind. My wife was right to make us cross the street.[28]
A guide who had noticed we were not ordinary tourists took us through the Petersen House. I sat in that small room a long time. The bed, the chair, the knowledge that a president died a few feet from where tourists now whisper. I found myself wondering what Lincoln’s mind was doing while the body shut down. I cannot know. I think he was thinking about the Union as a moral object. I think the Awakening’s grandchildren were in that room whether anyone said Edwards’s name or not.
Then Gettysburg. We took the RV and gave the battlefield days, not hours. Weather, timing, day one, day two, day three, the cemeteries, the spot of the Address. I have read the military histories.[29] What I could not shake was the interior of the men. What do you tell yourself when you stand up on the third day and move toward a fence line that is trying to erase you? Some of them had Bibles. Some of them had fragments of sermons. Some of them had only the residue of a culture that had already decided the Union was a covenant and slavery a crime against it.[30][31]
A republic capable of spending that much blood to keep a proposition alive did not get that capacity from a seminar on self-esteem. It got it from a long Christian argument about the human person, providence, and judgment. Lincoln’s Second Inaugural is what that argument sounds like when it has to bury hundreds of thousands of its own sons.
The Cascade I Keep Seeing
I will put the chain as cleanly as I can, knowing historians will want asterisks and I will give them some.
Without Paul, the Jesus movement remains a Jerusalem story. Without that scaled faith, there is no Christendom to form Europe’s conscience. Without that conscience, the English Protestant world does not produce an Edwards. Without Edwards and the Awakening, the American founding generation does not speak with the moral confidence it actually used—even the ones who were not revivalists. Without that founding, there is no Union for Lincoln to save. Without Lincoln, the American experiment becomes a slave republic with European manners.
That is not a straight line on a chalkboard. It is a watershed. Remove the spring and the towns downstream do not exist in the same form. I think Paul is the spring. I think Edwards is one of the American aqueducts. I think Washington and Lincoln are what the water looks like when it has to put on a uniform.[32][33][34]
People who only memorize the names of apostles miss this. They know who died. They do not know why the death did not end the firm. Paul is the reason the firm had branches.
The Business DNA of the Christian West
Once I saw Paul as a scaler, I started seeing the later fights differently. Mission movements that worked were not only brave. They were organized. They printed. They raised money. They trained. They built schools that outlived the missionaries. They treated the gospel as something that had to arrive in a form a stranger could use.
Only after that practical machinery proved it could create loyalty, literacy, and order did the Roman world—and much later the American world—fully absorb what it could not kill. I do not mean Christianity became a mere business. I mean it survived because it was not allergic to competence.
That is why I get impatient when the same voices that enjoy hospitals, universities, and human-rights talk treat business itself as original sin. The anti-business mood in the modern West is not just an economic opinion. It is often an attack on the very mechanism that let a demanding faith endure: independent people who can move, build, refuse a patron, and take a message across a border without asking a committee for permission.
Paul refused to live off handouts when the handout would have compromised the work. A civilization that sneers at that instinct will not keep the civilization Paul helped make. It will keep the vocabulary for a while. Then it will keep only the complaints.
Imperfect Instruments: Why I Compare a Businessman to Paul
I am going to say the impolite part. A lot of Christians wanted their political deliverance to arrive dressed like a Sunday-school painting. History does not usually staff itself that way. Paul had been a persecutor. He was not the profile the Jerusalem church would have ordered from a catalog.
I look at Donald Trump the same way I look at other blunt instruments in American life. I do not need him to be a systematic theologian. I need to notice what actually happened: a businessman with a public mess behind him enlarged the platform available to people who had been lectured out of public life. Charlie Kirk and a lot of ordinary conservatives could stand in rooms they would not have been invited into. I think that matters. I also think it is possible to be grateful for a door and still wish the doorman had better manners.
Paul did not come in the package people expected. Neither do most of the people who keep a movement from being locked in the sacristy. If your test for usefulness is polish, you will be ruled by people who are good at meetings and bad at history.
What a Second Great Awakening Would Actually Look Like
I do not think the next awakening arrives as a White House program. Administrations can restrain harm and they can appoint judges. They cannot regenerate a people. That work starts in churches, kitchens, Bibles, and arguments that last longer than a news cycle.
When I drive around my community on Sundays I see a lot of churches. Many of them are doing honest work. Many of them are reciting names. They know the apostles. They know the outline. They do not always know the politics inside the outline—the fight between purity and scale, martyrdom and mission, the local table and the empire of cities. That is why I am having this conversation in public. Surface catechism will not hold a civilization that is being talked out of itself.
A modern awakening would look, in practice, like people recovering nerve. Not vibe. Nerve. The willingness to tell the truth about good and evil without outsourcing the definitions to whatever academic fashion is currently eating its own young. It would look like families that treat children as souls rather than lifestyle accessories. It would look like churches that can stand a businessman in the pulpit without calling him unclean and can stand a poor man in the pulpit without calling him a mascot. It would look like gratitude for the West instead of a permanent apology for having won.
Edwards hoped God would walk with a people through the battlefields of ordinary life. I want that sentence back in circulation. Not as décor. As an operating assumption.
Why I Will Keep Talking to AI About This
A lot of people who read me despise artificial intelligence. Some of them despise Elon Musk on principle. They think any conversation like this is a rehearsal for a comic-book villain. I understand the fear. Tools this sharp can cut the wrong direction.
I also think it is cowardice to let the fear own the tool. We built machines that can hold a line of argument, retrieve a library, and stay in the fight when a human conversation partner gets tired. Used stupidly, that becomes a substitute for thought. Used properly, it becomes a way to do what Paul did with letters: send a structured argument into places the sender cannot physically be.
This is not a prophecy of Ultron. That is a man using a new press. The first Great Awakening had Whitefield’s lungs and a rising print culture.
A second one will have churches, Bibles, and whatever honest instruments we refuse to surrender to people who hate the civilization that made the instruments.[35]
I am not asking anyone to worship a model. I am asking them to notice that reference, memory, and argument are part of spiritual warfare too. If the principalities are real, they are not frightened by our refusal to use a library because the library is now silicon.
Know Where You Are
I watched, not long ago, the easy public habit of praising every sacred book as if they were interchangeable courtesy items. Respect, as a civic manner, is one thing. Amnesia is another. I have read the Qur’an more than once. I can say, without theatrics, that it has never done to my mind what Edwards does, and it has never done what Ephesians does. That is not a foreign-policy program. It is a reader’s report.
A nation that cannot tell the difference between the sources of its own law and the sources of someone else’s empire is a nation preparing to be edited. I will not help with the editing. The point of the progressive pressure I have spent years writing against is not manners. It is unmaking. If you want to unmake a people, you first convince them that the faith which built their hospitals, their conscience, and their suspicion of kings was always a crime scene.
I think that project is the current face of the old war. Flesh and blood will carry it. Flesh and blood are not the origin of it.
What I Want the Reader to Do
If you only remember one practical sentence, remember this: start with Paul if you want to know how the faith survived, and start with Edwards if you want to know how it learned to speak American.
Buy the book if you can. Read Ephesians slowly, out loud, as if it were written to a congregation that might split next week—because that is the situation it was written for. Then read Edwards on affections and ask whether your religion is an appetite or a performance. Then walk some actual ground. Necessity. Vernon. Gettysburg. The cheap seats at Ford’s Theatre. History gets into the legs in a way it does not get into a feed.
Notes
The numbered references in the text correspond to the sources below and to the bibliography. Biblical citations follow common English versification; quotations from Ephesians use the New King James Version to stay with the Edwards study edition.
[1] The Jonathan Edwards Study Bible: Experience Abiding Joy in Christ (NKJV), general editor Dr. Matthew Everhard (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, August 18, 2026). Notes drawn from Edwards’s corpus; essays on his life, theology, spiritual practices, and the First Great Awakening; Edwards’s Resolutions; introduction to the Miscellanies system.
[3] Acts 18:3. The Greek is skēnopoioi, traditionally “tentmakers.” See Kenneth Berding, “Was Paul a Tentmaker? Part 1,” The Good Book Blog, Biola University, October 18, 2021.
[4] Acts 2:44–47; Acts 4:32–37. Compare the later famine collection in Acts 11:27–30. Historians generally read the Jerusalem sharing as voluntary generosity inside a threatened community, not a standing political economy.
[5] Acts 4:13.
[6] Galatians 2:11–14; Acts 15:1–35.
[7] Josephus, The Jewish War; Tacitus and Suetonius on successive unrest under Rome.
[8] Revelation 1:9. The boiling-oil tradition is in Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics 36.
[9] 1 Clement 5; Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 2.25. Traditional date: Rome, under Nero, c. A.D. 64–67.
[12] Clinton E. Arnold, Powers of Darkness (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992); Walter Wink, Naming the Powers (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984); Hendrik Berkhof, Christ and the Powers, trans. John Howard Yoder (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1977).
[13] Ephesians 2:11–22; 3:1–13.
[14] Larry W. Hurtado, Destroyer of the Gods (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2016); Larry Siedentop, Inventing the Individual (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2014).
[15] Tom Holland, Dominion: How the Christian Revolution Remade the World (New York: Basic Books, 2019).
[16] Tom Holland, Dominion: How the Christian Revolution Remade the World (New York: Basic Books, 2019).
[17] Peter Brown, The Rise of Western Christendom, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013).
[18] Christopher Dawson, The Making of Europe (London: Sheed & Ward, 1932).
[19] Jonathan Edwards, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” Enfield, Connecticut, July 8, 1741.
[20] Jonathan Edwards, A Treatise Concerning Religious Affections (1746); Freedom of the Will (1754).
[21] Alan Heimert, Religion and the American Mind (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966); Patricia U. Bonomi, Under the Cope of Heaven (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986); Thomas S. Kidd, The Great Awakening (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007); Frank Lambert, Inventing the “Great Awakening” (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999).
[22] Calvin Coolidge, Address on the One Hundred and Fiftieth Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, Philadelphia, July 5, 1926.
[23] George M. Marsden, Jonathan Edwards: A Life (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003); Mark A. Noll, America’s God: From Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002).
[24] Edwards died March 22, 1758, weeks after becoming president of the College of New Jersey. The responsible historical claim is cultural inheritance, not a pocket sermon in every haversack.
[25] The Works of Jonathan Edwards, Yale University Press; digital corpus at the Jonathan Edwards Center, http://edwards.yale.edu.
[26] National Park Service, Fort Necessity National Battlefield. Battle of July 3, 1754.
[27] Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia.
[28] Ford’s Theatre National Historic Site and Petersen House, Washington, D.C. Lincoln died April 15, 1865, at 7:22 a.m.
[29] Allen C. Guelzo, Gettysburg: The Last Invasion (New York: Knopf, 2013).
[30] Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address, November 19, 1863; Second Inaugural Address, March 4, 1865.
[31] Lincoln, Cooper Union Address, February 27, 1860; presidential fasting and thanksgiving proclamations, 1861–1865.
[32] George M. Marsden, Jonathan Edwards: A Life (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003); Mark A. Noll, America’s God: From Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002).
[33] N. T. Wright, Paul and the Faithfulness of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2013); F. F. Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977).
[34] Gordon S. Wood, The Radicalism of the American Revolution (New York: Knopf, 1992).
[35] Harry S. Stout, The Divine Dramatist: George Whitefield and the Rise of Modern Evangelicalism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991).
[36] Hoffman, Rich. The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business.
Bibliography and Further Reading
Scripture and primary Christian sources
The Holy Bible, New King James Version. Nashville: Thomas Nelson.
The Jonathan Edwards Study Bible: Experience Abiding Joy in Christ (NKJV). Edited by Matthew Everhard. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2026.
Edwards, Jonathan. A Treatise Concerning Religious Affections. 1746.
Edwards, Jonathan. Freedom of the Will. 1754.
Edwards, Jonathan. “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.” Sermon, Enfield, Connecticut, July 8, 1741.
Edwards, Jonathan. The Works of Jonathan Edwards. 26 vols. New Haven: Yale University Press. Digital edition: Jonathan Edwards Center at Yale University. http://edwards.yale.edu.
The Apostolic Fathers. 1 Clement. Late first century.
Eusebius of Caesarea. Ecclesiastical History.
Tertullian. Prescription Against Heretics.
Paul, the early church, and the powers
Arnold, Clinton E. Powers of Darkness: Principalities and Powers in Paul’s Letters. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992.
Berding, Kenneth. “Was Paul a Tentmaker?” Parts 1–2. The Good Book Blog. Biola University, 2021.
Berkhof, Hendrik. Christ and the Powers. Translated by John Howard Yoder. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1977.
Bruce, F. F. Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977.
Dunn, James D. G. The New Perspective on Paul. Rev. ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005.
Hurtado, Larry W. Destroyer of the Gods: Early Christian Distinctiveness in the Roman World. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2016.
Meeks, Wayne A. The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983.
Stark, Rodney. The Rise of Christianity. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996.
Wink, Walter. Naming the Powers: The Language of Power in the New Testament. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984.
Wright, N. T. Paul and the Faithfulness of God. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2013.
Christianity and Western civilization
Brown, Peter. The Rise of Western Christendom. 3rd ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013.
Chesterton, G. K. The Everlasting Man. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1925.
Chesterton, G. K. Orthodoxy. London: John Lane, 1908.
Dawson, Christopher. The Making of Europe. London: Sheed & Ward, 1932.
Holland, Tom. Dominion: How the Christian Revolution Remade the World. New York: Basic Books, 2019.
Lewis, C. S. The Abolition of Man. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1943.
Lewis, C. S. The Screwtape Letters. London: Geoffrey Bles, 1942.
Siedentop, Larry. Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2014.
Edwards, the Awakening, and American political religion
Bonomi, Patricia U. Under the Cope of Heaven: Religion, Society, and Politics in Colonial America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.
Heimert, Alan. Religion and the American Mind: From the Great Awakening to the Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966.
Kidd, Thomas S. The Great Awakening: The Roots of Evangelical Christianity in Colonial America. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007.
Lambert, Frank. Inventing the “Great Awakening.” Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999.
Marsden, George M. Jonathan Edwards: A Life. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003.
Noll, Mark A. America’s God: From Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Stout, Harry S. The Divine Dramatist: George Whitefield and the Rise of Modern Evangelicalism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991.
Sweeney, Douglas A. “Jonathan Edwards: Legacy.” Jonathan Edwards Center at Yale University.
Tocqueville, Alexis de. Democracy in America. 1835–1840.
Founding, Union, and the ground I walked
Blight, David W. Frederick Douglass: Prophet of Freedom. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2018.
Coolidge, Calvin. Address on the One Hundred and Fiftieth Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Philadelphia, July 5, 1926.
Guelzo, Allen C. Gettysburg: The Last Invasion. New York: Knopf, 2013.
Lincoln, Abraham. Cooper Union Address. February 27, 1860.
Lincoln, Abraham. Gettysburg Address. November 19, 1863.
Lincoln, Abraham. Second Inaugural Address. March 4, 1865.
National Park Service. Fort Necessity National Battlefield. Farmington, PA.
National Park Service. Ford’s Theatre National Historic Site. Washington, D.C.
Wood, Gordon S. The Radicalism of the American Revolution. New York: Knopf, 1992.
Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association. George Washington’s Mount Vernon. Mount Vernon, VA.
Classical and Roman context
Josephus. The Jewish War.
Tacitus. Annals.
Suetonius. The Twelve Caesars.
The author’s related work
Hoffman, Rich. The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business.
Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com. If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.
I have been thinking a lot lately about what it actually takes to push a civilization forward, and the more I dig into the mechanics of power, the clearer it becomes that the decisive factor is rarely the collective. It is the rare individual who refuses to accept the current ceiling. Rainer Zitelmann’s New Space Capitalism: The Entrepreneurial Path to the Stars is one of those books that lands at exactly the right moment because it forces the conversation back onto that hard truth. The foreword by Newt Gingrich sets the tone, but the real value is in how Zitelmann lays out the entrepreneurial path to the stars without the usual romantic fog. He understands that the technical pieces are largely in place; the missing ingredient has always been the institutional and cultural permission for individuals to own the risk and the reward.
I have read a lot of books on strategy over the years. Robert Greene’s Power series is solid, particularly when you need to see the patterns that keep repeating across centuries. But the concepts only become useful when you translate them into the actual arena you are operating in—whether that is a small business, a national culture, or the emerging space economy. That is why I wrote The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business the way I did. I wanted to strip the abstraction away and show how leadership actually works when the consequences are real—the same principles scale. At every level, the decisive question is the same: does the system protect and amplify the person who is willing to impose a higher standard, or does it systematically cut that person down to the level of the committee?
That is the danger I keep returning to when I look at the post-colonial messaging that has saturated our universities and media over the last generation. The surface story is that colonialism was uniquely evil and must be endlessly atoned for. The stronger effect is to pathologize the very traits that built the most productive societies in history—individual agency, technological dominance, the willingness to claim and develop resources. A lot of money flows into that messaging, and not all of it is organic. Anyone who has watched the funding streams into American higher education over the last fifteen years knows that Chinese influence, both direct and through corporate intermediaries that depend on the Chinese market, has been substantial. The same pattern showed up in Hollywood a decade ago. The first weekend China box-office number became the make-or-break figure for big studio releases because a hundred-million-dollar Chinese gross was realistic for a major title. Studios adjusted content, softened political edges, and chased that market until the politics shifted and the arrangement began to sour.
China does not need to kick the door in. The preferred method has always been to work the cultural and regulatory back doors until the target society starts policing its own exceptional people. That is the real war, and it is fought at the level of incentives and narrative long before any kinetic phase.
Zitelmann devotes time to the Chinese model and is careful not to caricature it. Roughly 60% of China’s economic activity is in the private sector. The catch, and it is the entire ballgame, is that private ownership does not equal private control. You may hold the equity, but the Party retains the right to manage the owners. The individuals who generate the wealth remain on a short leash. That arrangement can produce impressive aggregate numbers for a while. It cannot produce, and will not tolerate, an Elon Musk.
The clearest demonstration of the difference is the story of Jack Ma. In 2020, at the height of the COVID lockdowns in the West, Ma was still the richest man in China, with a fortune north of $50 billion. He had built Alibaba and Ant Group into engines that actually moved the Chinese economy. Then he made the mistake of publicly criticizing the financial regulators. Within days, the Ant Group IPO—the largest in history at the time—was suspended. Ma disappeared from public view for months. When he resurfaced, he was a chastened figure operating under much tighter constraints. The message was unambiguous: you can get rich, but you will not be allowed to become independently powerful. The state will let you own the assets only as long as you accept that the state ultimately owns you.
That is the model. And it is the model that certain elements within the United States have been trying to import for years through regulatory pressure, board governance norms, and a cultural campaign that treats exceptional individuals as threats to the collective. Look at the pattern. Steve Jobs was pushed out of Apple in 1985 by a board that preferred managerial predictability over the difficult personality who actually created the products. The company nearly died until they brought him back. Sam Altman was removed from OpenAI by the board in 2023 because he was insufficiently candid with them; employees and the market forced a reversal within days because everyone understood that the board lacked the vision Altman did. Travis Kalanick was forced out of Uber in 2017 after investors decided the founder’s edge had become a liability. Jack Dorsey, Jeff Bezos at various pressure points, Elon Musk himself more than once—every one of these people has faced the same institutional reflex. The committee always prefers the safer average over the dangerous high performer.
I call the people who staff those boards Normies. They are not evil in the cartoon sense. They value belonging more than they value results. Their deepest instinct is to reduce variance, and high-agency individuals are the ultimate source of variance. When that instinct captures the governing institutions of a society, the society begins to select against the very people who generate its outsized economic output. Less than one percent of any population produces the breakthroughs that the other ninety-nine percent live off of. If you systematically attack that one percent—through regulation, through cultural stigma, through the soft coercion of “stakeholder” governance—you do not get a more equitable society. You get stagnation, then decline.
China understands this dynamic perfectly and has weaponized it. The goal is not to out-innovate the United States in a head-to-head contest of free individuals. The goal is to change the cultural and regulatory climate in the United States so that the next generation of American Elons Musks never has the room to operate. That is why the post-colonial curriculum, the DEI machinery, the reflexive hostility to “tech bros,” and the expanding regulatory state all point in the same direction. They are different instruments playing the same tune: exceptionalism is the problem, collective management is the solution.
SpaceX is the living counter-example, and that is why the recent IPO matters so much. Elon waited until the Starship factory was producing vehicles at a cadence that actually changes the economics of access to orbit. Only then did he open the capital floodgates. The risk of going public is real—once the ownership base expands, the pressure to behave as a normal public company intensifies. But the dual-class structure and the sheer scale of the opportunity give him a window. The capital will accelerate the cadence from monthly launches to weekly, and eventually to daily. That is how you open a multi-trillion-dollar space economy. It is also why the same forces that neutralized Jack Ma have been trying for years to neutralize Musk through every available regulatory and cultural lever.
I supported Trump for the same reason Musk did. Both of them saw the pattern clearly. Another four years of the prior trajectory would have continued the slow strangulation of the independent centers of production. The Chinese model does not need to conquer America by force. It only needs America to adopt the habit of cutting its own high performers down to size. Once that habit is locked in, the GDP gap closes on its own.
The real debate almost nobody is willing to state plainly is this: China wants to destroy people like Elon Musk. America, at its best, wants to create the conditions that produce more of them and then get out of their way. Everything else—trade policy, university curricula, board governance norms, the cultural treatment of ambition—is downstream of that single civilizational choice. Zitelmann’s book is valuable because it keeps the focus where it belongs. The stars will not be reached by committees optimizing for consensus. They will be reached by the rare individuals who refuse to accept the current limits, and by the societies that still know how to protect them.
Footnotes
1. Rainer Zitelmann, New Space Capitalism: The Entrepreneurial Path to the Stars (Skyhorse Publishing, 2026), with foreword by Newt Gingrich.
2. On the sixty-percent private-sector contribution figures and the limits of private control in China, see Zitelmann’s earlier analysis in “State Capitalism? No, The Private Sector Was And Is The Main Driver Of China’s Economic Growth,” Forbes, September 30, 2019, and the discussion of Chinese commercial space companies in his 2026 work.
3. Jack Ma’s October 2020 speech criticizing Chinese financial regulators, the subsequent suspension of the Ant Group IPO, and his months-long disappearance from public view are documented in Bloomberg, “Jack Ma’s Empire in Crisis After China Halts Ant Group IPO,” December 22, 2020, and contemporaneous reporting from The Guardian and Wired.
4. Steve Jobs’s 1985 ouster from Apple and 1997 return are standard corporate history; see, among many sources, the accounts in Walter Isaacson’s biography and contemporary board accounts.
5. Sam Altman’s removal by the OpenAI board on November 17, 2023, and rapid reinstatement are detailed in OpenAI’s official announcement and subsequent reporting by The New York Times and CNBC.
6. Travis Kalanick’s forced resignation as Uber CEO in June 2017 under pressure from major investors is covered in The New York Times, June 21, 2017.
7. SpaceX’s June 12, 2026 IPO, the $135 share price, approximately $75 billion raised, and roughly $1.75 trillion valuation are confirmed in the company’s S-1 filings and contemporaneous Reuters and CNBC reporting.
8. On Hollywood’s dependence on the Chinese box office in the 2010s and the resulting content adjustments, see the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission report “Directed by Hollywood, Edited by China” (2015) and later analyses of the market’s decline after 2019.
Bibliography
Davenport, Christian. Various reporting on commercial space.
Greene, Robert. The 48 Laws of Power and related works.
Hoffman, Rich. The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business.
Isaacson, Walter. Steve Jobs.
Zitelmann, Rainer. New Space Capitalism: The Entrepreneurial Path to the Stars. Skyhorse Publishing, 2026.
Zitelmann, Rainer. “State Capitalism? No, The Private Sector Was And Is The Main Driver Of China’s Economic Growth.” Forbes, September 30, 2019.
U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. “Directed by Hollywood, Edited by China.” 2015.
Contemporary reporting from Bloomberg, Reuters, CNBC, The New York Times, and The Guardian on Jack Ma (2020), Sam Altman (2023), Travis Kalanick (2017), and the SpaceX IPO (2026).
Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com. If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.
