Kerby Anderson
I recently saw a list from the History Channel about seven inventions during the Gilded Age that changed the world. It reminded me of a commentary I did a dozen years ago based upon Mark Steyn’s book, After America.
He had us imagine what it would be like to bring your great-grandfather living in the late 19th century to an ordinary American home in 1950. The poor gentleman would be astonished. This home is full of mechanical contraptions. There is a huge machine in the corner of the kitchen, full of food and keeping the milk fresh and cold. And he would hear an orchestra playing somewhere and then discover it came from a tiny box on the kitchen countertop.
He would look out the window and see a metal conveyance coming down the street at an incredible speed. It’s enclosed with doors and windows. It’s like a house on wheels. There are lots of these things called cars, but not a horse or horse-drawn carriage in sight.
But now imagine you could send someone from 1950 to our world today. I think they would be disappointed. Not much has changed at all. Sure, there are computers and smartphones, but I would imagine that he would have expected more changes than he found. Most of the remarkable changes took place a hundred years ago.
Why did much of our technology reach a plateau? Physics and politics are two reasons. We can dream of flying cars, time machines, and teleporting devices, but there are physical limits that prevent them from being created.
The other reason is politics and especially bureaucratic regulations. Government makes it much more difficult to be an inventor and an entrepreneur. It is time to roll back the size of government that stifles innovation and imagination.

Kerby Anderson
Matthew Solomson argues that “Social Justice Is Injustice.” His op-ed attempts to explain why we see so many young people supporting the terrorist actions of Hamas. They have been taught in school an inverted view of justice.
He reminds us that, “When federal judges take the oath of office, they say: “I will administer justice without respect to persons and do equal right to the poor and to the rich.” This is a biblical principle that is part of our Judeo-Christian heritage. Justice isn’t about power.
A person with great power could be a good or bad person depending on their actions. Likewise, a person with little power could also be good or bad depending on the circumstances. But that simple evaluation has been changed in the minds of the younger generation. Those in power are oppressors, and those without power are victims.
Does Israel have a right to fight against terrorists who commit atrocities? This involves a moral calculus. You must evaluate who acts virtuously and who acts viciously. He admits that: “Though no country is virtuous all the time, Israel seeks peace and in war doesn’t specifically target civilians. Israel holds no kidnapped babies, nor does it steal billions of dollars of foreign aid to build tunnels where terrorists can hide while using women and children as human shields.
It is time to speak plainly. Murdering innocent people is wrong. Supporting them and cheering them on is also wrong. There is no justification for the atrocities that were committed last month against innocent Jewish citizens.
An ideological approach to ethics that sees people as groups, tribes, and classes can blur the natural human reaction to evil. And that is why we see students attempting to justify what is unjustifiable. It fills the world with injustice.