Showing posts with label 1970s. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1970s. Show all posts

Saturday, August 15, 2026

Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 18th Edition. Primary Voting Commences Edition. Vote like your future and that of your state depends on it, because it does, part three.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 18th Edition. Primary Voting Co...: Robert M. Carey, left, Robert D. Carey, right.  Robert M. Carey was a lawyer, rancher, judge, and Congressman, Senator and Governor of Wyomi...

The 2026 Election, 18th Edition. Primary Voting Commences Edition. Vote like your future and that of your state depends on it, because it does, part three.

Robert M. Carey, left, Robert D. Carey, right.  Robert M. Carey was a lawyer, rancher, judge, and Congressman, Senator and Governor of Wyoming who received the Democratic nomination for the office in 1910 after determining to leave the Republican Party in order to defeat its machine.  He followed Theodore Roosevelt into the Progressive Party and never returned to the GOP.  Robert D. Carey was his son was a Converse County banker and rancher who was part of the Progressive Party National Committee from 1917 to 1918 and who was elected to the position of Governor as a Republican in 1918.  He later served a single term as U.S. Senator from Wyoming.  Both men are proof who don't have to be a lockstep sycophant to be an effective politician.

Less than one week to go until the primary, which unless something bizarre happens, Trump defects to Russia taking Chuck Gray with him. . . Hageman and Degenfelder join the CPUA. . ., that will be the election for a lot of positions.

Although maybe not quite all.

As earlier noted, I've already cast my vote.  And honestly, in spite of the really disappointing overall choices at the statewide level, there were a few really good candidates.  

I voted for:

Governor:  Barlow.

Senate:  Mead

House of Representatives:  Christensen.

Secretary of State:  Short.

Superintendent of Public Instruction: Harshman

Everyone of these candidates was somebody you could really get behind.

There are others.  I'd note, more locally, Campbell for the House as well as Jarvis. And Engebretsen for the Senate.

And then there are a collection that really need to be sent packing.  Ide, Bear, Allemand, for example.  For that matter, Rasner, Gray, Friess and Hageman need to be retired from politics by the electorate.

We have, we note, only discussed the GOP candidates for the most part.  The GOP, now, is practically two parties in and of itself.  There's the Republican Party, and then there's the Calvinist Theocratic Party, the WFC.  They could not be more different.  One is a conservative party and the other a Protestant Christofascist party.  That sounds extreme, but unfortunately, it's true.

We haven't discussed the Democrats hardly at all, and for the most part, they stand no chance.  There are some exceptions.  Provenza in Albany County will go back into the legislature, for example. But there are a few others worth noting.  James Byrd, who is running for the U.S. Senate, is one.  If Mead doesn't win, Byrd may give Harriet Hageman a real run as on Wyoming issues, he's a better candidate.  I think Mead would beat him as Mead is a good candidate.  If Hageman defeates Mead, and then defeats Byrid, it will be simply because a fair number of people right now would vote for Josef Mengele if ran as a Republican.

The race for Superintendent of Education features two good Democrats, Ana Cordova and Sergio Maldonado.  Again, in a normal functioning democracy, either one would be a good contender in the general election. Probably neither stands a chance this year, but if Harshman does not win the primary, the race will at least be interesting.

August 12, 2026

A Freedom Caucus member:

Felony intimidation is not Rep. Gary Brown’s only conviction. He pleaded guilty to harassment in 2013.

And the far right in the state arguing with itself:

This whole thing is sort of inside baseball.  In terms of outright goofball positions Rasner is every bit as far right as anyone in the WFC.  Distinguishing their positions from his own is impossible, as they're the same.

Gray, however, unpacked the Freedom Caucus from his carpetbag and is one of the founding members of the populist movement in the state, which figures, as he isn't from the state, like almost all of its major members.  In endorsing Gray, they endorsed one of their own.  They couldn't have not endorsed him as that would have caused a major rift in the organization and would really have been unthinkable.

And Rasner has always been the odd man out in other ways, one being that he's an acknowledged homosexual, even if he's not noisy about it in any fashion.  He is noisy about almost everything else.

The WFC defended Gray and attacked Rasner in its response;

Reid Rasner is a failed career candidate who has brought division, dysfunction and political games to our state.  Wyoming deserves strong conservative, like Chuck Gray.

Calling Gray "strong" is really rich.  He's a whiny little weenie who likes to call people names.  And more than that, really.

Gray is noisy, but Wyomingites know almost nothing about him whatsoever.  Rasner has a much more open history, including having once run for a municipal position in Las Vegas and having been in a same sex legal union ending in divorce.  We know Gray is from Los Angeles originally, went to Wharton, and then moved to Casper to work at his daddy's radio station, where he had a vitriolic radio show.  His personal history is a complete mystery.  He's not only not known to have a love interest, he's not even known to have a like interest.

And then there's Bo Biteman.

Biteman was regarded as fully WFC in the last legislature.  WFC members, save for some of the core members, can usually disavow their membership when convenient as they keep no formal records of whose in and out.  Biteman said, according to the article;

The Freedom Caucus brings plenty of noise, I’ve ignored them when they’ve attacked me, I’ve ignored them when they’ve taken credit for work I helped lead, and I’m going to keep ignoring the distractions.

Well, suck it Bo.  You are WFC and simply pretending you aren't hasn't kept people from knowing that.  

David Giralt, whose positions seem to be about as far right as Gray's, Friess' and Rasner's, but who is more soft spoken about them, also threw rocks at the WFC, accusing them of  “very aggressive culture war tactics that, at the end of the day I think, just work against what the legislative process should be: holding true to your political ideological convictions and then working to get things done.”

What a joke.  Giralt may be a nice guy, but being a nice guy and a veteran doesn't excuse having the same set of positions as the WFC, as far as we can tell.

Friess took a page out of the national playbook, arguing that Republicans “fight the real enemy, the radical left AOC/ Mandami Socialists.”

M'eh.   

Balow, at least, was honest, endorsing their views, but noting that they're a bit nasty in pursuing them.  Her endorsement of their weltanschauung is part of the reason why we abandoned her in favor of Christensen.  Christensen, for his part, noted how ideologically driven the WFC is and how that had a detrimental impact on the 2026 Legislature.

The fact that members of the populist hard right, both going down in flaming defeat in next week's primary, are now throwing rocks at the WFC is really remarkable.  The WFC has always been downright nasty and full of hypocrisy, and they may now being getting ready to take on water.  This is a good time to get off the ship.

Overall, however, this is a really interesting development.  As campaigns begin to fail, and Biteman's, Rasner and Giralt's are failures, with Rasner's being a career ending failure, people are starting to be a more honest about things.  Frank Campman, freed of tight fitting cowboy boots that look like he got them in the children's department, and his Woody's Roundup cowboy hat, move way to the center almost immediately after he dropped out of the race.  Rasner just recently exposed Chuck Gray's campaign manager, Gabe Saint, who was terminated from his intern position with Harriet Hageman due to the Francoist websites he'd been following, which is unfortunately a story that didn't go anywhere because Rasner is such a gadfly and had his own hosts of absurd extreme reels, such as promising to prevent Sharia Law from entering the state.

So, the far right Carpetbagger Caucus Revolution is in trouble and its outliers, those who were always a bit careful about it, and those whom it wouldn't let in the door, are now attacking it.  It hasn't seen that happen before.

There were some primaries across the country yesterday.

An amusing one is Mike Lindell, the "My Pillow" guy, going down in flaming defeat.  Lindell comes across as not particularly smart, which puts him in the MAGA Not Particularly Smart Branch of that movement.  Lindell has endorsed every wack job conspiratorial theory on Trump's 2020 election defeat that Trump has put out, and even was monkeying around with Wyoming's vote that election which was for Trump.  Lindell recently left his company to run for Governor of Minnesota.


Lindell had no chance of winning the primary as only the stupid and ignorant would vote for him.  That's what happened.  He's not accepting that however, claiming, in true Trump/MAGA style that there were "irregularities".

Lisa Demuth won the race with 43.4% of the vote.  Lindell did bring in 32.5% of the vote, which some have been shocked by.  One person asked if his supporters were stupid. 

Well, probably a lot of them are.

Let's be honest about stupidity, as the country has a real stupidity problem right now.

The United States has always had a strong anti intellectual streak, which endorsed the native intelligence of the common man. Frankly, it's been one of the problems the country's always been afflicted with. But at the same time, up until now, there's never been an era in which education was despised. Right now, we're seeing a lot of that. The reason is fairly simple. The really intelligent, through technology, have made it possible for the stupid to have a voice.


Which brings us to the bell curve.


Human intelligence it not really very well understood, even today.  Perhaps in some ways we don't know that much more about it than we ever did.  Btu what we do know is that in an average population, there's a mean.  Half the people are above it, and half below it.

More than that most of the people are somewhere on the middle part of the curve.  But if you divide it into thirds, 1/3d of it is considerably above the rest in terms of intelligence, and 1/3 considerably below.  Like Larry David's skit lampoons, we let the bottom third vote.

Therefore, it'd be somewhat fair to say that Lindell's 1/3d of the Minnesota vote represents "the stupid ones", and to some extent, it actually does.  While some of low intelligence would have voted for other candidates, Trump uniquely appeals to stupid.

He also uniquely appeals to the ignorant, which is not the same.  And that's where the story of intelligence gets complicated, particularly in voting.  I have a friend, for example, whose highly intelligent, but completely disinterested in politics.  He still votes.  A lot of rural people I know are big Trump supporters, not because they're dumb, but because they listen to their neighbors and they've all collectively bought off on BS Trump conspiracy theories.  As part of that, however, I'll note, that they're mostly poorly educated.

Anyhow, take the dumb, the ignorant, and the poorly educated together, you probably have at least 33% of the population.  Technology makes the difference.  In prior eras, those people were influenced by the smarter and the well educated around them.  Now, they're influenced by themselves.

Amy Klobuchar, who have (and still would) make a good President, won the Minnesota Democratic nomination. She's going to be Minnesota's next Governor.

In the Wisconsin gubernatorial race, Democrat David Crowley narrowly beat Democratic Socialist Rep. Francesca Hong.

This was a failure in the polls, by the way, as Hong was heavily favored in polls to win.

Whether they should be or not, Democrats are probably breathing a sign if relief over that, but they probably should actually be taking stock on what's really going on.  It's being interpreted as the party base going to the radical left, but in reality Democratic Socialism is simply the smarter kid brother of MAGA. I.e., it's populism wearing the educated team jersey rather than the Kelly's bar and grill jersey.  There was always a really strong chance that MAGA's today would be rooting for Bernie Sanders tomorrow, and its starting to happen.  And frankly some of the Democratic Socialist platform, like universal healthcare, are ideas that have not only arrived, they arrived and should have been adopted 80 years ago.  In other words, as we've said before, the rise of Democratic Socialism isn't necessarily a bad thing, but both the Democrats and the GOP need to find a way to steal its popular platforms.

In a sane political system, it'd be really easy for the American Solidarity Party to enter right here, but unfortunately we lack that.

Trump backed Tom Tiffany, a Freedom Caucus member, won the GOP nomination. 

The Republicans hold the legislature in Wisconsin, the Democrats the Governor's office.  My predictions is that the Democrats retain the Governor's office and gain the Senate there.

Showing the emerging trend, in Connecticut 78 year old Democratic Rep. John Larson went down in defeat to 47 year old Luke Bronin, the former Hartford mayor and a former Navy intelligence officer.  The Democrats are booting out the boomers. 

About time.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was on This Week as the Press is treating her as the national leader of the Progressives and the Democratic Socialists.  I really think that this is wholly in error, although she was a very early member of a Democratic Socialist chapter to be elected to Congress.* There's a lot of things I disagree with Ocasio Cortez politically, including her support of abortion, but her analysis on the state o things in these elections, which came before yesterday's' primaries, was astute.  She noted that Millennials are mad, and are implicitly mad at the Baby Boomers.  They are, and they aren't the only ones.  Generations Jones and Generation X are also really angry with the Boomers, even though the Boomers seem wholly clueless about this.

Going back to Minnesota, progressive, but not Democratic Socialist, candidate Peggy Flanagan defeated a centrist Rep. Angie Craig for the Democratic Senatorial primary.  She'll now face Republican winner  Michele Tafoya, a former National Football League sideline reporter.

Flanigan is a Native American.

The seat is presently held by Democrat Tina Smith.  Flanigan is likely to win it.

cont:  

From the Governor:

OP ED by Governor Mark Gordon: Wyoming Doesn’t Need More Mud Slinging

August 12, 2026

My friend and erstwhile opponent in the 2018 Primary for Governor approached me a few days before election day and said, “Mark, I might actually beat you.” He had good reason to think that. It had been a hard campaign.

His entrance into the race had been a surprise to the entire field, but he approached it with grace, humor, and enthusiasm grounded in his faith. He earned his spurs, so to speak, by traipsing all over Wyoming with the rest of us, walking parades, answering questions at forums and debates. Campaigning is tough for anyone but this 79-year-old man, it was clear, had demonstrated he had the stuff it takes to be a strong leader.

I took his comment seriously. By then he had Chuck Norris backing him and Donald Trump Jr. Foster Friess was a fierce competitor eventually gaining President Trump’s endorsement shortly before the primary. 

Foster and I agreed to keep the race above board – and I believe we did. Sure, there were some clumsy and ineffective 3rd party shenanigans towards the end, but neither of us ever condoned them.

Foster was always a gentleman, as were Sam Galeotos and Taylor Haynes. All were among the first to offer help to a new Governor with  so much to learn from each. I am grateful because I know it isn’t easy to offer a hand after such a hard fought election . It sucks to lose and it really hurts.

This election, similar to the one two years ago, has amplified the sorts of big city, big money, nasty half-truths and flat-out lies or falsehoods that have become all too common in other states. It’s not the Wyoming I know.

Here we respect the Code of the West, and most candidates always worked to discourage that sort of campaigning. They understood it was offensive to Wyoming people, who pretty well know right from wrong. Contrast is one thing, but bearing false witness is taboo for a population that appreciates all ten of the Commandments.

Where has that sensibility gone? This election we have been abused by cynical political operatives whose stock-in-trade is to twist facts and foment suspicion with incomplete, dishonest tales and misinformation. Especially galling are out-of-state political operatives who get paid big bucks for duping voters.  I hope their vilification is misplaced in the Cowboy State.  Wyoming voters are honest and they care. 

I believe voters will see through the baloney that passes for politics elsewhere and will come to rest on those candidates who know what they are talking about, know and care about Wyomingites and know what is important to Wyoming – jobs, family, the economy, and our way of life.

Ask yourself, is this candidate talking mostly about someone else, or, as they should be, are they listening and talking about the things that will keep our core industries vital, our way of life secure, our kids safe, and our communities whole. Ask yourself if what they are saying is valuable to your community, to your family, to your grandchildren –  or is it just political blather and mud?

Ask what a candidate has actually done to make the state better and why.  Ask for details. 

I say enough with the name calling, the false information, the nasty for nasty sake. Enough with the schlock that uses Wyoming voters as fundraising bait. Let’s elect people for who they are and what they will do, not for what some mysterious, never-heard-of-them-before organization ginned up to make voters mad. Let’s elect people to represent our interests, not puppets who parrot consultants’ talking points.  

Ride for the brand!

Cont:

The number of mailers per day has now reached the absolutely insane level.

Real attack mailers are now coming, and they are quite frankly absurd. The ones directed at Barlow are at the level where the authors should be forced to memorize the Summa Theologica in the original Latin and be able to recite it back without looking, particularly the part on lying.

One that came today compared Liz Cheney to Reid Rasner.


Seriously?

That would be in favor of Reid Rasner.

Harriet Hageman's today emphasized her protecting Second Amendment rights. What flaming carp.  The 2nd Amendment hasn't been under attack now for decades.

There were three Steve Friess ones, all devoid of content, as all of his hard.  He promised to use his "Conservative" values to help President Trump.

Trump isn't a conservative, he's a fascist, with it often failing to be noted that both fascism and communism are populist movements (so is socialism).  And at this point, for those wanting to "help" Trump, these questions should seriously be asked:

  • Do you intend to help him launch more illegal wars?
  • Do you intend to pursue the illegal wars without a declaration of war, and are you willing to bear the cost of the dead on your souls?
  • Do you intend to support illegal tariffs?
  • Do you intend to help subvert the result of the election?
  • Do you intend to help Donald Trump get richer while the lower middle class gets poorer?
  • Do you intend to help wreck Christianity in the country by pretending that Trump's a Christian?
Why the crap would anyone pledge to help Trump?

Conservatives wouldn't.


Apparently nobody thinks about the heepings of bullshit that go into the real far right mailers.  But Wyoming voters are polite in not asking any politician about his background.  Right now, for instance, you don't know anything about the carpetbagger candidates save what they have chosen to tell you.

August 15, 2026

So, the money trail for Governor.

Barlow leads with over $1.6M.  raised of which 75% is individual donors, 95% of which were in Wyoming.  Degenfelder comes in at $1.2M . The biggest share of her funds were from personal and family loans, of which $25,000 is from herself, and $500,000 from her father.

Bien only raised $200,000.  95% of his donors were also from within Wyoming.

Virginian based Make Liberty Win has spent $549,000, even importing in carpetbagging young people to distribute it's flyers. They've come to the door twice.  They're backing Freedom Caucus candidates.

Yesterday brought another thick crop of flyers.

Footnotes:

*She's not the first.  The first outright Socialist to be elected to  Congress, which she is not, was  Rep. Victor L. Berger of Wisconsin, who was elected in 1923.  The first Democratic Socialist to be elected to Congress was Korean War Marine Corps veteran Ronald Vernie Dellums of California, who was elected in 1971.  He served in that position until 1998.  

It's notable that with quite a few Democratic Socialist their affiliation is rather mixed.  It's almost more akin to being a member of a Caucus, like the Freedom Caucus, than actually being a member of a party, even though it is a party. Typically, Democratic Socialist run as Democrats, just as Freedom Caucus members run as Republicans rather than as fascists or Francoist.

Last edition:

The 2026 Election, 18th Edition. Primary Voting Commences Edition. Vote like your future and that of your state depends on it, because it does, part two.Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,



Labels:

Sunday, September 28, 2025

Lex Anteinternet: A Protestant Dominionist Dictatorship brought to you by Project 2025 and the New Apostolic Reformation or the End of the Reformation?

Lex Anteinternet: A Protestant Dominionist Dictatorship brought to y...

A Protestant Dominionist Dictatorship brought to you by Project 2025 and the New Apostolic Reformation or the End of the Reformation?

When Trump was elected President, people, for the second time in a row, thought "oh he won't be so bad".  

He's been as bad as expected, and worse.

A large segment of the politically aware American demographic is wondering, nearly every day, "what on Earth is going on here" as the Trump administration does something odd day after day.A second group, his core MAGA adherents, ignore the oddities and assume that a lot of the nonsense about lurking Marxist must be true, and assume that Trump is doing what needs to be done to save the Republic.

Well, Trump is demented, which explains a lot. But there's something else going on. And that something else is Christian Nationalism with a strong Protestant Dominionist focus.

Round Head flag, English Civil War.  Takinginterest01, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons. There were several varieties of this standard, as there was no standardized Parliamentarian flag.


Trump himself isn't really a sharp enough tool in the shed to do what's occurring. quite frankly, and at any point in his life, he probably wouldn't be interested enough to care anyway, as long has people are praising him and he seems to be getting what he wants..  To the extent he has any deep thoughts at all, and he likely doesn't, many of his real thoughts and desire run contrary to much of what's occurring.  Trump, after all, is nothing much more than a wealthy playboy.  He likes money, women, and has bad taste. M'eh.

But Trump was savvy enough to know he needed muscle and backing to get into office and moreover back into office.  The intellectual muscle has been provided by far right populist, Protestant Evangelicals and their fellow travelers, the latter of which will live to regret ever being associated with the movement.  Trump supporting Catholics are going to come to particularly regret traveling on this bus.  

We've often said here that the United States is a Protestant country, culturally.  It's so Protestant that people who aren't Protestant often are, culturally. Right now we have a really good example of that in the form of Stephen Wright, who is Jewish by heritage and perhaps by practice, but who in views is a raging Calvinist.  It's pretty easy to find run of the mill, and even some non run of the mill, Catholics in the Trump fold who likewise culturally looked not to Rome, and not even to Luther, but to John Calvin.  

The very first religiously significant group of English colonist in North America were religious dissenters, something very much worth remembering. The Puritans were Calvinists, not members of the dominant and official religion of England, the Church of England.  Their landing in 1620 came in the context of an ongoing struggle in England over what England was to be, in terms of its faith.  The Anglicans were in control at the time the Puritans left for North American shores and they were also suppressed for their religious radicalism in their native land.  England was now solidly Protestant, sort of, with latent Catholicism seemingly having been beaten down with the peasants losing the Prayer Book Rebellion of 1549, but whether England would be radically Calvinist or sort of looking back at its Catholicism with the Church of England had not been determined.  That question would provide much of the background to the English Civil War in which the parliament sought to depose an Anglican king, while being lead by a Calvinist who would be declared the Lord Protector.  Ultimately, Calvinism didn't sit well with the English, and while parliament won the war, the crown would be restored and playboy king seated on the throne, who would convert to Catholicism sometimes prior to his death.

Calvinist would flee to North America upon the crown being restored.

The early English colonies in North America were frequently religiously intolerant.  They were commonly sectarian and aggressively enforced the religion of their founders.  The Puritans did not come to North America for religious freedom in the manner in which so often portrayed in grade school when I was a kid, but rather to avoid suppression under the crown and enforce their version of Christianity where they lived.  People living in Puritan colonies had mandatory worship requirements at the local Calvinist church.  It's not as if, if you lived in one, you could sit that out, or for that matter declare that you were a Catholic and would worship elsewhere.

Mary Dyer, a Quaker, was executed in Massachusetts for preaching her variant of Protestantism in that colony.  


Christian Dominionist look back to the Puritans and the 1600s for their concept of what the state should be like.  Not to the 1770s to 1790s.  They may not all do so consciously, but they do.  When they say that the United States is a Protestant nation, they mean its a Puritan one.

We all know, of course, that 1st Amendment protects the freedom of worship. That text states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
When that law, and that's what it is, was added to the Constitution in 1791 the infant United States was much different that the loose group of sectarian colonies of the 1600s.  Indeed, the mother country itself was much different than the one that had fought the English Civil War.  Having endured that experience, and with its own history of sectarianism, what the drafters of the Bill of Rights wanted was to avoid there being a Church of the United States, which if it had been created, would have been a branch of the Anglican Church.  The amendment protected the right of various people to worship as they saw fit, or not at all.  Modern conservatives have decried the Courts for decades about this amendment being misinterpreted, but it isn't.  The Bill of Rights inserted religious tolerance ito the law.

Be that as it may, there's no doubt that the country remained a Christian nation.   Other religions made an early appearance, setting aside native religions, very early on, but they were a distinct minority.  A Jewish house of worship existed in New York, for example, as early as 1654.  But overall, non Christian religions were practiced to a very small degree.  And early patterns of settlement meant that the sectarian nature of the colonies continued to reflect itself into the early 1800s, and even into the mid 19th Century, although patterns if immigration began to heavily impact that, particularly the immigration of Catholics, who were largely detested by everybody else for a very long time.  Be that as it may, American culture reflected Protestant Christianity well into the 20th Century and still does today.

This began to break down, as so much in our modern culture has, in the 1960s with the Baby Boom generation. Baby Boomers, or at least many of them, outright rejected many of the basic tenants of Christianity and brought in the really loose cultural Christianity, although with a leftward tilt, that we see today.  One religion was a good as another, Christianity was basically "be nice".  The warnings that St. Paul had given in his letters were ignored. 

Things decayed.

On this site we've tracked some of that decay.  While not meaning to spark a mass debate, we've noted the erosion of hetrosexual religious standards starting in the late 1940s and which were in full bloom before the Baby Boom generation with the massive success of Playboy magazine, and the concept of the loose moral big boob dimwit and sterile "girl next store", who was always ready to have sex. By the 1960s the erosion was becoming generational.  By the 1970s it was becoming part of the culture and homosexuality began to openly emerge.  Marriage started taking a big hit by the 1980s, with divorce becoming increasingly common by the late 1970s  A culture in which divorce had been hard to obtain had evolved into one where marriage wasn't necessary at all, and ultimately into one where same sex couples could marry, the original meaning of marriage having been pretty much lost.

Enter (Evangelical) Christian Dominionism.

In 1975 Evangelicals Loren Cunningham and Bill Bright had a meeting in which they claimed to receive a divine message related to the culture.  They were shortly thereafter joined in their infant movement by Presbyterian theologian Francis Schaeffer..  They claimed a mandate from the Devine to invade and achieve dominion over the "seven spheres" of society identified as family, religion, education, media, entertainment, business, and government.  The New Apostolic Reformation is informed by this movement.  And this is the Evangelical wing that is active in the Trump Administration and which have heavily influenced Christian Nationalist.

Dominionist, no matter what they may say, are not democratic.  They are part of the Illiberal Democracy movement, and in the United States, they are the very core of it.  Believing that the culture has been hopelessly corrupted in the seven spheres, they do not seek to convert by example, but to seize control of the culture, force a reformation of it, and bring about a Puritan nation on the model, sort of, of the original Puritan Massachusetts Bay Colony.

Puritan flag of the Massachusetts Bay Colony.

This heavily aligns with the concept of Illiberal Democracy.   You can have a democracy, the Dominionist and Illiberal Democrats hold, as long as it fully accepts the predominant cultural world outlook.  No countering that is allowed.

Now, something careful observers will note is that this movement is now all over the European world.   And some of the early Christian Nationalist are most definitely not Evangelical Christians.  R. R. Reno is a convert to Catholicism from the Episcopal Church.  Patrick Dineen is a Catholic, although he's notably moved away from the Republican Party and is now openly part of the American Solidarity Party.  Rod Dreher was a Protestant who converted to Catholicism and then converted to Orthodoxy.  He's also now moved on from the Republican Party to the American Solidarity Party.  The head of the Heritage Foundation, which is responsible for Project 2025, is Kevin Roberts, who is Catholic.  And of course, J. D. Vance is a Catholic convert.

How do we make sense of this?

Well, one way in which we can makes sense of this, although not in the case of Dineen, Reno or Dreher, is to admit that a large segment of Catholics are heavily Protestantized, although this notably excludes younger Catholics and recent converts who most definitely are not.  Gen. Jones Catholics and Gen. X Catholics were often very poorly catechized and therefore you can find quite a few who have gravitated to the far political right and who will state very Evangelical views of things which they have picked up from it, sometimes theological views that  Catholics don't hold at all.  Boomer Catholics went through the entire Spirit of Vatican Two era and are sometimes pretty beat up by it, and the younger ones experienced the Kennedy betrayal of religious adherence which caused many Catholics to follow suit.  Some Boomer Catholics were on the very liberal Church end as well to the irritation of nearly everyone else in the Catholic sphere, who are glad to see their waning influence, but who contributed to the atmosphere the same way that poorly catechized late Boomer/Jones/Gen X Catholics were, but with a certain added massive whineyness on some occasions.

Anyhow, while it happened later than the birth of the Dominionist movement, intellectual and younger Catholics have moved towards an increased conservatism for quite some time, and it is now really visible in the Church.  Overall it's a very good development, because it's so Catholic, and it reflects the view expressed in the letter to Diognetus more than any Seven Mountain tract.  But the decay in the culture, which is particularly evident from the much more informed Catholic perspective, has caused some intellectuals, notably Dineen, Reno and Dreher, to despair of the culture and, in the case of of all three, to openly maintain that liberal democracy is an experiment that has failed.2

They aren't dominionist, however. They're more in the nature of Catholic Integralist, a movement that long predates Christian Nationalism or Dominionism.



Integralism argues that the Catholic faith should be the basis of public law and public policy within civil society, wherever the preponderance of Catholics within that society makes this possible.  It formed out of the chaos of the late 19th Century in Europe and was strong in traditionally Catholic Romance language speaking countries.  It never supported the concept of a state religion, but rather subordinating the state to the moral principles of Catholicism, rejecting morality from the state, and, in its European form, favoured Catholicism as the proclaimed religion of the state

Integralism really fell away from Catholic thinking as a discussed topic after World War Two for a variety of reasons, one being that modern liberal democracies quite being hostile to religion, which frankly most had been before the Second World War.  Indeed, over time, the Church increasingly disapproved of clerics being in politics, and ultimately banned it.  But in 2014, with an essay by Dinneen, it started to reappear.  It's adherents claim that its the official position of the Church, but fail to acknowledge that on many things the church's "official" position can be pretty nuanced.  Even prior to the Second World War it had always been the case that integralist took the view that imposing a Catholic view of things on a population couldn't be done on a non Catholic culture.  In more recent years the Church has really emphasized that there's a civic duty to participate in elections, which while not rejecting integralism, does demonstrate a view accepting democracies and requiring Catholics to participate in their democracies.

The revival of integralism came about the same time, however, that dominionism started to gain steam, and for same, but not identical, reasons.  Dineen's essay came out in 2014, but the following year the Supreme Court issued the Obergefell v. Hodges decision, and just as we predicted here, thing have really gone off the rails.  Justice Kennedy's decision lead directly the populist outrage and right on to Donald Trump.

Obergefell was just a bridge too far for many Americans, but the drift towards societal libertinism it expressed had been going on for a long time.  As we've noted, you can trace it back at least to 1953 and the release of Playboy, but savvy students of culture would point out that perhaps the signs were there as early as the very first movies, which took a run at pornography right from the onset until being reigned back in.  Mass communications of all types, including mass media, had a big role in this no matter how much society attempted to restrain it.  The moral shock of the First World War lead to the Roaring Twenties which foreshadowed the 1960s, interrupted only by the economic deprivation of the 1930s and the Second World War.  At any rate, the decay had set in pretty deep even by the early 1970s.

Anyhow, Integralism and Dominionism are not the same thing. Pope Francis, noting a rising connection between Integralism and Christian Nationalist, approved a publication criticizing the drift in this direction.  Catholics getting tied up in the far right Evangelical movement's goals are going to be in for a surprise when they learn that many in that community would not even regard Catholics as Christians.  The re-Puritanization of the country would not be a good thing for Catholics, who after all hold a very broad view of Christianity rather than a nationalistic view of it, and who don't share the same millennialist views of things at all.

Dominionist, for their part, would be shocked to learn that Integralist hold a lot of things that Dominionist frankly accept as abhorrent. They may be united on abortion being evil and transgenderism being contrary to the moral law, but modern American Evangelical Christians would be surprised that the mass of the Catholic Church holds divorce to be a great moral wrong and condemns easy remarriage.  They'd also be surprised to learn that Catholics condemn sex outside of marriage, including all sexual acts outside of the unitive type, to be grave moral wrongs, and that's the Catholic concern with homosexuality.  

Rod Dreher, who seems to have joined the Christian Nationalist movement, or who had joined it (I'm not sure about his current position, given that he's a member of the American Solidarity Party), early on advocated a sort of walled in approach to societal moral decay in his book The Benedict Option.  I criticized that approach here, and he seems to have retreated from what he seemed to indicate that book espoused.  Anyhow, looking at the situation overall, this is a really dangerous moment in American history, but also one from which Western societies might emerge into something new, and better.

Much of this comes in the context of the collapse of the Reformation, and it stands to accelerate it.  At the end of the day, holding Donald Trump as any sort of "Godly Man" is absurd. The direct attack on American democracy, which is occurring as we write, is highly dangerous, but probably won't succeed.  Forces on the other side have taken forever to react, but are finally starting to, including a reassessment of the really radical and downright goofball positions the left has advocated for some time.  The New Apostolic Reformation and Dominionist movement carrying the flag is causing "Christianity" to be condemned, but among thinking Christians is causing a reassessment of the Reformation churches and a massive movement away from them back into the Apostolic fold, as the theology of the Reformation churches simply can't be defended.

Roman society was reformed by Christianity, but not by operation of law, but by operation of the faithful members of the "one Catholic, Holy and Apostolic Church".  We're in the death throws of  the Reformation, of which this is all part.  If that's right, it'll be a blessing in the end.

Footnotes:

1.  In fairness, a lot of the odd things that Trump does is because he very obviously has dementia, which nobody is doing anything about.  He's really not mentally stable enough to occupy the office he's in.

2.  Evangelicals of the far right are particularly focused on transgenderism and homosexulaity, but just completely ignore almost all of the remaining actual Christian tenants on sex.  Donald Trump, whom Evangelicals have really adopted, is a serial polygamist.  White House "faith advisor" is on her third husband.  Evangelical churches have pews fill up on Sundays with people who are living in what St. Paul very clearly condemned as states of mortal sin.

Related threads:

A Protestant Country. It's history, and what it means.







Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 22nd Edition. The Stupid on Stilts Edition.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 22nd Edition. The Stupid on Sti... : From Greed , 1925. We're making a fortune. So if the Republica...