The promise of Christian Nationalism

[Jimmy Higgins]

There are three powers that can change an American president's mind: the wallet, the ballot, and the bullet. On civil rights issues, the first is impossible, the third unpalatable, so the middle option is the only lever most are willing to pull. I would love to live in a magical realm where God speaks to the heart of every politician and tells them to do the right thing. But we do not live in that world. Ours is a world of metal, gristle, and the imperfect physics of social action. When politicians lose their fear that public opinion may impact them personally, democracies fall.

Democracies fall when people seize power, or didn't bother to not vote against the asshole who says he'd be a dictator.

 

[Politesse]

There are three powers that can change an American president's mind: the wallet, the ballot, and the bullet. On civil rights issues, the first is impossible, the third unpalatable, so the middle option is the only lever most are willing to pull. I would love to live in a magical realm where God speaks to the heart of every politician and tells them to do the right thing. But we do not live in that world. Ours is a world of metal, gristle, and the imperfect physics of social action. When politicians lose their fear that public opinion may impact them personally, democracies fall.

Democracies fall when people seize power, or didn't bother to not vote against the asshole who says he'd be a dictator.

If that's happening, you've already lost.

Trump should be in jail, not on a ballot. Do not tell me that he's out and free because I questioned whether religious ethnocide is acceptable. He is not. No one asked me. Trump is out and free because 74 million people want him to be, and because theocratic white nationalism is a more potent force in Washington than the vague appeasement policy of the DNC or the crippled progressive movements it willfully undercuts.

 

[TomC]

Trump should be in jail, not on a ballot.

Trump is on the ballot because just enough American voters, in just the right places (like Michigan), did not vote for Clinton in 2016. That's also why RvW was blown up.


Doesn't matter what you think should be. That's what is.
Tom

 

[Politesse]

Trump should be in jail, not on a ballot.

Trump is on the ballot because just enough American voters, in just the right places (like Michigan), did not vote for Clinton in 2016. That's also why RvW was blown up.


Doesn't matter what you think should be. That's what is.
Tom

It's funny, we seem to mutually consider one another dangerously naive about the realities of political life. I suppose history will decide who is right.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Liberals: What can be fairer?
Conservatives: What can be safer?

Liberals want information.
Conservatives want confirmation.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I really don't think it is asking for much, to ask for a coherent argument concerning when and how it is acceptable to kill innocent people. If you have a moral compass at all, you should be able to explain what it is, and when and where it applies. If you don't, I'm not going to take your moral arguments seriously; if you have never rationally considered your own ethical positions, why should I? Especially on an issue as momentous as the targeted killing of children. I have rationally considered my own ethical position on this issue, and am happy to explain at whatever length you have the patience for, why I consider mass killing of civilians to be both morally reprehensible, and strategically and diplomatically suicidal.

The reality is that if you don't accept the killing of innocents in war you automatically hand power to the most evil because they ensure that innocents will die in stopping them. Reality is ugly.

You minimize civilian deaths but avoiding them entirely is impossible. As technology has gotten better we have gotten better at hitting specific targets rather than just dropping whole strings of bombs in the general area. But it's still far from perfect.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Tom, with all due respect, Israelis could have easily sent in peacekeeping forces and engineers all this time to build and protect schools and hospitals until Hamas is seen as the violent gang they are and gets pushed out.

It would have put the peacekeeping forces at risk of bricks, and hate.

It would have gotten the peacekeeping forces dead. Or captured.

 

[Jarhyn]

Tom, with all due respect, Israelis could have easily sent in peacekeeping forces and engineers all this time to build and protect schools and hospitals until Hamas is seen as the violent gang they are and gets pushed out.

It would have put the peacekeeping forces at risk of bricks, and hate.

It would have gotten the peacekeeping forces dead. Or captured.

Or would have gotten a lot of them just there. The thing is, not enough people exist in Isreal who don't want the Palestinians dead.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Tom, with all due respect, Israelis could have easily sent in peacekeeping forces and engineers all this time to build and protect schools and hospitals until Hamas is seen as the violent gang they are and gets pushed out.

It would have put the peacekeeping forces at risk of bricks, and hate.

It would have gotten the peacekeeping forces dead. Or captured.

Or would have gotten a lot of them just there. The thing is, not enough people exist in Isreal who don't want the Palestinians dead.

And how would it have gotten them "just there" when any that went would be captured or killed?

 

[Jarhyn]

Tom, with all due respect, Israelis could have easily sent in peacekeeping forces and engineers all this time to build and protect schools and hospitals until Hamas is seen as the violent gang they are and gets pushed out.

It would have put the peacekeeping forces at risk of bricks, and hate.

It would have gotten the peacekeeping forces dead. Or captured.

Or would have gotten a lot of them just there. The thing is, not enough people exist in Isreal who don't want the Palestinians dead.

And how would it have gotten them "just there" when any that went would be captured or killed?

Send enough people to keep them from getting kidnapped/killed and/or accept the kidnappings or killings when they happen because they are few and the unfortunate consequence of the ongoing horror that has happened until now.

 

[Politesse]

The reality is that if you don't accept the killing of innocents in war you automatically hand power to the most evil because they ensure that innocents will die in stopping them. Reality is ugly.

Israel is not minimizing civilian deaths. They have intentionally and openly widened their CCR to 20/1 and has many times over bombed refugee trains they knew had no military targets within them. You tell me I'm not facing the ugliness of reality, but you're the one avoiding the news because you do not want to hear about the consequences of your nation's foreign policies.

You minimize civilian deaths but avoiding them entirely is impossible. As technology has gotten better we have gotten better at hitting specific targets rather than just dropping whole strings of bombs in the general area. But it's still far from perfect.

Technology is getting better? That's a fucking joke, the AI known as Lavender has been a major instigator in all of this "collateral damage", and continues to be. During the first phase of the Israeli invasion, her operators spent less than a minute investigating each of her recommendations before ordering strikes.

 

[unapologetic]

I am reminded of an old saying:
"if voting could change anything, it would be illegal. -
If not voting could change anything, that would be illegal too."

No one is owed a vote on the sole basis of not being the other candidate,

Philosophically, I agree, that is true. But the reality is we (atheists and other rational people) will suffer if Rump gets in the White House again.

talking as though they are is only going to further alienate those voters who are already uncertain about whether they can justify voting for either candidate.

I don't see that. I see it as reminding the undecided that there are important differences in the integrity of the candidates.

...and that voting at all in an overwhelmingly blue or red state is futile, so it really doesn't matter.

I live in PA. I consider my vote dam important.
I even changed my registration to Republican. So I can vote against Rump this Tuesday. Even if the primary is already decided.

Trump should be in jail, not on a ballot. Do not tell me that he's out and free because I questioned whether religious ethnocide is acceptable. He is not. No one asked me. Trump is out and free because 74 million people want him to be, and because theocratic white nationalism is a more potent force in Washington than the vague appeasement policy of the DNC or the crippled progressive movements it willfully undercuts.

Your apparent apathy about voting, confounds me.

 

[Politesse]

I am reminded of an old saying:
"if voting could change anything, it would be illegal. -
If not voting could change anything, that would be illegal too."

No one is owed a vote on the sole basis of not being the other candidate,

Philosophically, I agree, that is true. But the reality is we (atheists and other rational people) will suffer if Rump gets in the White House again.

talking as though they are is only going to further alienate those voters who are already uncertain about whether they can justify voting for either candidate.

I don't see that. I see it as reminding the undecided that there are important differences in the integrity of the candidates.

...and that voting at all in an overwhelmingly blue or red state is futile, so it really doesn't matter.

I live in PA. I consider my vote dam important.
I even changed my registration to Republican. So I can vote against Rump this Tuesday. Even if the primary is already decided.

Trump should be in jail, not on a ballot. Do not tell me that he's out and free because I questioned whether religious ethnocide is acceptable. He is not. No one asked me. Trump is out and free because 74 million people want him to be, and because theocratic white nationalism is a more potent force in Washington than the vague appeasement policy of the DNC or the crippled progressive movements it willfully undercuts.

Your apparent apathy about voting, confounds me.

Apathy? I take my vote incredibly seriously. I don't see selling it to the second lowest bidder regardless of who they are, without even pausing to think about it first, as a signifier of value. Not thinking critically about things indicates how few fucks you give about the subject, not how many. The wider issue of Christian theocracy in the US, supposedly the topic of the thread, is also not going to be meaningfully addressed by pretending only it only exists in Red America, never in Blue. Were it so simple, it would be easy to solve. Just outvote the Reds. But it isn't. The Left and the Right have been fighting the same holy war for the last thirty years, undifferentiated by presidency. Our soldiers, allies, and victims bear the main brunt of this, but war is not good for democracy either. Demonstrating your party loyalty by turning off your brain at strategic intervals is a strategy with diminishing returns, even if you truly believe your faction to be the best.

 

[ZiprHead]

Apathy? I take my vote incredibly seriously. I don't see selling it to the second lowest bidder regardless of who they are, without even pausing to think about it first, as a signifier of value. Not thinking critically about things indicates how few fucks you give about the subject, not how many. The wider issue of Christian theocracy in the US, supposedly the topic of the thread, is also not going to be meaningfully addressed by pretending only it only exists in Red America, never in Blue. Were it so simple, it would be easy to solve. Just outvote the Reds. But it isn't. The Left and the Right have been fighting the same holy war for the last thirty years, undifferentiated by presidency. Our soldiers, allies, and victims bear the main brunt of this, but war is not good for democracy either. Demonstrating your party loyalty by turning off your brain at strategic intervals is a strategy with diminishing returns, even if you truly believe your faction to be the best.

That's a lotta words to say nothing.

 

[Politesse]

And you used seven words to say nothing. Good job?

 

[Lion IRC]

If this was going on in another country with liberal democratic values and the religious radicals were in a realistic position to take power and create a Gilead or force the Law of Moses on everyone then that countries intelligence agencies would step in and start eliminating the leadership of those religious fanatics

Create a Gilead?

Thanks for letting me see this internal clip of the coming Gilead.

Gilead?

Did you miss the plot of Handmaids Tale?

Gilead is ruled by undisguised fake Christians who don't practice what they preach.

 

[Swammerdami]

It's amazing how fast threads develop here! This is a new topic started just two weeks ago and already has 140+ posts. I'm not going to wade through the whole thread, but clicked to Page 8 to see where it had led.

Trump should be in jail, not on a ballot.

Trump is on the ballot because just enough American voters, in just the right places (like Michigan), did not vote for Clinton in 2016. That's also why RvW was blown up.


Doesn't matter what you think should be. That's what is.
Tom

It's funny, we seem to mutually consider one another dangerously naive about the realities of political life. I suppose history will decide who is right.

This final comment confuses me. It seems to me that TomC and Politesse each sees the same problem, each has a valid viewpoint, but is expressing it differently. I agree with TomC: Voters should NOT have voted for Trump. I agree with Politesse: Trump should be in jail.

What am I missing? @ Politesse, Why -- using little words -- is TomC dangerously naive? @ TomC, similar question?

 

[Jarhyn]

If this was going on in another country with liberal democratic values and the religious radicals were in a realistic position to take power and create a Gilead or force the Law of Moses on everyone then that countries intelligence agencies would step in and start eliminating the leadership of those religious fanatics

Create a Gilead?

Thanks for letting me see this internal clip of the coming Gilead.

Gilead?

Did you miss the plot of Handmaids Tale?

Gilead is ruled by undisguised fake Christians who don't practice what they preach.

Did you miss the OP? The post I was responding to? Do you fail to understand that the majority of Christians in the US and everyone who would put anyone they think is a "woman" "back in the kitchen" are 'fake' in this way? That nobody in the political movement for project 2025 are actually Christian?

Perhaps you missed the plot of The Handmaid's Tale?

You realize that the difference between a disguised Anti-Christian and an undisguised one is whether the Anti-Christian has power...

The guy in the OP is exactly that, an Anti-Christian.

Anyone who would vote for Trump etc, is.

Lion, Jesus preached love for the foreigner, making space for the refugee, acceptance of sex workers, and active support for sexual minorities... if we are to believe the Gospels as to what Jesus believed, if there ever was such a person.

We are talking here about the oncoming theocracy in the US.

 

[TomC]

What am I missing? @ Politesse, Why -- using little words -- is TomC dangerously naive? @ TomC, similar question?

With regard to this thread, I think our biggest difference is the degree of importance we put on voter apathy.

I see it as huge. We started our conversation concerning Michigan voters and support for Biden.

I see voter apathy as both a cause and result of the worst aspects of the USA political landscape. The number of low information, low turnout, and single issue voters makes it easy for the rich and ruthless people to run the country.
Tom

 

[Swammerdami]

With regard to this thread, I think our biggest difference is the degree of importance we put on voter apathy.

I see it as huge. We started our conversation concerning Michigan voters and support for Biden.

I see voter apathy as both a cause and result of the worst aspects of the USA political landscape. The number of low information, low turnout, and single issue voters makes it easy for the rich and ruthless people to run the country.

Yes. If voting were mandatory -- as it SHOULD be, and IS in Australia, Brazil, Belgium and several other countries -- the Blues would win every election in a landslide^*. Of course that's why voting will never be made mandatory in the present political clime. Instead the Reds take the opposite tack, DISCOURAGING voting by all but extremists.

* - Not quite. With mandatory voting, the Reds would be forced to moderate their positions; appealing only to nut-jobs would no longer be a viable strategy.

But voter turnout is mostly higher now than it was in the 1970's, 80's and 90's. I focus blame on the Information Age (better called the Disinformation Age?), especially social media.

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.

Nowadays the lie spins around the world seven times before the truth even decides which pants to wear.