Showing posts with label Donald Trump. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Donald Trump. Show all posts
Friday, March 14, 2025
Sunday, February 23, 2025
Lex Anteinternet: What's wrong with the United States? The Protestant Work Ethic.
Lex Anteinternet: What's wrong with the United States? The Protesta...:
.png)
What's wrong with the United States? The Protestant Work Ethic.
Professor Galloway "on follow your passion".
His advice?
Don't.
More particularly, his advice is dedicated yourself relentlessly to something you are good at, and it will become your passion, in no small part as you'll make money at it.
There's plenty of evidence that's right. . . and just as much that it's wrong.
Professor Galloway is a Calvinist. He comes by it naturally as his father is from Scotland.
Oh, sure, you'll note that Galloway states he's an atheist. Well, like a lot of people who are something on an existential level, he doesn't know what he actual is. And what that is, is a Calvinist. Perhaps a cultural Calvinist, but a Calvinist.
And it was Calvin, not the Church of England, or the Lutherans, who gave us the Protestant Work Ethic.
Well, that's great, right?
Not so much.
John Calvin was as French radical Protestant reformer who was grim in his outlook and basically an asshole. One of his central core beliefs was double predestination, which held that from the moment of conception almost everyone was going to Hell.
Calvin taught that all men must work, even the wealthy, because to work was the will of God. Irrespective of their ultimate fate, which they could in no way impact, it was the unyielding duty of men (and I do men men) to toil here on Earth as part of God's plan to continue the creation of the Earth. Men were not, in his view, to become wealthy, I'd note, but were to reinvest the fruits of their labor over and over again, ad infinitum, or to the end of time.
Calvin held that using profits to help others rise from a lessor level of subsistence violated God's will since persons could only demonstrate that they were among the Elect through their own labor.
The Puritans were Calvinists, and so were the Presbyterians, the latter of which has generally slacked up on Calvinist theology a great deal. None the less, the impact of Calvinism on the US has been huge. It founded the thesis that you should work and work, well past the point where accumulation of wealth made any sense. When you look at people like Elon Must or Donald Trump who have vast sums of wealth but keep accumulating, you are seeing the Protestant work ethic at work.
You are also seeing it when you lay people off in droves. They're lessors, and their economic plight is existentially foreordained. If they were among the Elect, this wouldn't be happening to them.
Work is what it's all about.
You see that well expressed in Galloway's comments. Galloway is an opponent of Musk, but they have essentially the same view on work. Galloway presents in the grim Calvinist style. You must find productive and useful work and love it, as that's the ticket to everything.
It isn't.
Contrary to what Galloway things, for one things, there are plenty of people who have done well in their carers and know a lot about what they do and hate it. The legal profession is a poster child for this, but I've found it to be the case for medicine as well.
And women have become particularly the victim of this in recent years, diving hard into careers as, John Calvin has told them, this would affirm that they were part of the Elect, in the modified American social view, only to find that they are miserable.
And all this because Calvin was flat out wrong. His theology was wrong, and his understanding of human beings appallingly wrong.
The Catholic view has been much more nuanced than the Protestant one. Catholicism itself holds to a degree that we work, because we have to, work being one of the results of the Fall. It also hold, however, that we toil as part of a community and are never to put that aside. The accumulative nature of the Protestant Work Ethic is basically antithetical to Apostolic Christianity, although there are certainly Catholics, such as Bill Gates, who have become extremely wealthy. Largescale wealth, however, comes in Catholic theology with a heavy burden to everyone else. Unlike Calvinist, you can't really morally justify investing over and over while those less well off suffer in your presence. Indeed, that would be one of the four sins God hates.
Okay, so why is this a problem?
It's a massive problem in that deep in American culture is an anti human dedication to acquisition and toil, that's why. People are expected to work themselves to death and tolerate those among us who acquire vast wealth. Ultimately, the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few, who often have simply benefitted from the circumstances of their birth takes from everyone else, makes millions miserable, and actually makes the economy less and less productive.
Society doesn't exist to generate wealth for those who can accumulate. Society exists for society. That means, at the end of the day, that some must be protected, for the good of us all, from their appetites, weather that appetite be for drugs, dissolute living, or avarice.
The fact that we have forgotten this is literally destroying the country.
.png)
Saturday, February 22, 2025
Lex Anteinternet: What's Wrong with the United States? We're really ignorant, and its getting worse.
Lex Anteinternet: What's Wrong with the United States? We're really...:
21% of adults in the US are illiterate. 54% of American adults have a literacy below a 6th-grade level.
What's Wrong with the United States? We're really ignorant, and its getting worse.
21% of adults in the US are illiterate. 54% of American adults have a literacy below a 6th-grade level.
And we wonder how Trump got elected?
The illiterate are ignorant, and blisteringly ignorant people vote for stupid stuff.
I had a very strange experience the other day, which I need to be indistinct about.
It had to do with homeschooling.
Twice in recent weeks I've run across a topic that's in the legislature, that being the legal requirement, which the Wyoming 2025 Legislative assembly is about to wipe out, that home schooling parents submit their educational plans to their local school districts. The requirement is there to prevent parents from basically not educating their children.
Not educating children is what homeschooling is all about.
This wasn't always the case, but it's become the case.
Some background.
My father was the first male in his family to graduate from high school. He might have been the third member of the family, as I don't know that much about my paternal grandmother's early life in that fashion. She probably graduated high school in Denver however, likely from a Catholic high school. His older sister graduated from a high school in Scottsbluff.
My father went on to a doctorate.
My paternal grandfather, who left school to work at age 13, had such an advance knowledge of mathematics that he helped his children with their high school calculus homework, which is revealing for two reasons, one that is amazing on his part, and secondly all of my father's siblings took calculus in high school.
I didn't take calculus in high school
My father could speak two languages, English and German, and had a knowledge of Latin. My paternal grandfather also could speak two languages, English and German, and had a knowledge of Latin.
My mother did not graduate from high school She was not given the opportunity to. She earned an Associates as a an adult. Her mother was university educated, as was her father. They all spoke two languages, English and French, and had a command of Latin.
Growing up in my family household was like getting a post doctorate in some things, history and science in particular. I read so early that I was on to adult books before I left grade school and had the odd experience of a junior high librarian not wishing to check a history book as she feared it was too advance. I read The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire before I left junior high.
I was in fact educated on a lot of stuff at home. . . but I was sent to school.
There's an interesting pattern here. Some of my friends of my age had college educated parents, but not all of them did. But all of my friends attended college or university. Not all graduated, but they did receive some post high school education. One of my closest friends had a father who did not graduate from high school. He joined the Army in his senior year to fight in World War Two, following in the footsteps of a father who had fought in World War One. My friend has two bachelors degrees.
And there's another thing here. Even those people I knew from my generation, and the prior one, who had parents that didn't graduate high school, had quite literate parents. If I ever went into a house that didn't have a lot of books somewhere, it was shocking. I can only really recall one. The home of my friend noted above was like a library. My parents house and that of all of my aunts and uncles were packed with books. In my parents house you could find a few books that were in German or French. A friend of mine who did not graduate from high school, but none the less went off to university, recalled his grandparents house being packed with books in . . . Gaelic.
My paternal grandmother absolutely insisted that my father go on to get an advanced degree, something he briefly though about not doing. His unmarried sister near in age to him was sent to university as well. I was given no real choice but to go on to higher education myself.
And this was common for people my generation, and the preceding one. Farm and ranch family in particular often had a manic dedication to higher education.
Home schooling has been around since time immemorial, I suppose, but when I was a kid, what it probably meant, where I live, is that the kid in question was living on a really remote ranch. Even then, most ranching parents made a dedicated effort to avoid that. More than a few had a teacher who lived at the ranch, paid for by the school district. The county I live in had four rural remote public schools, of which only one is still in operation. The neighboring one had some so remote that if you run across them on really rural roads its a shock. The teachers at these institutions were admired in a way that's hard to describe. Anything going on in the area always included them.
I didn't know a single homeschooled kid growing up.
Next to home schooling, of course, is private schooling. When I was young the only private school I ever heard of was the Catholic school. It was a big downtown school. It's moved from downtown, but it still exists. Catholic education had long been a thing in the US and apparently Catholics are supposed to send their kids to Catholic schools if they can, but I didn't go to it (it was full), nor did our kids.
When in high school I learned that there was a Lutheran grade school, to my enormous surprise, as I walked by it every day. After high school I learned that there was a "Christian" school, by which I mean a school attached to one of the sort of due it yourself evangelical Protestant groups. It started in 1978, so I would have been in high school when it commenced operating. The ministers for that church, at the time, were drawn from the congregation, and I later met one who was ironically adverse with its tenants as he was a geologist who accepted the truth of evolution, which the church did not.
A church that thinks evolution is a fib, probably doesn't have it taught in its schools.
Which is the point, really. The goal of a large amount of modern homeschooling is to keep students as ignorant as possible, which is conceived of as limiting tehir "exposure" to corrupting elements.
I've been exposed to a few homeschooled kids over the years and frankly a lot of them were rather weird and very socially awkward. Having said that, I've met one kid, and know of another, from a homeschooling family who were not that way, and one of which went on to a really high dollar career.
Now, with that comment, let me note that education isn't about getting rich, or shouldn't be. It's about the Allegory of the Cave. The problem here is that those exposed to the sunlight are seeking to drag the ir offspring back into it, deeper in the cave, and into chains.
The simple fact of the matter is that Americans were much more literate prior to the 1990s than they are now. They read. They read even if they hadn't graduated high school.
And they read a lot, and a lot of it is much more advanced than what people claim to read now. Even people who mostly read novels often read things much more advanced than people do now. I recall one parent of a family friend being a fanatic fan of C. S. Forester, whose novels were just that, but noen the less dealt often with the Napoleonic Wars, something a lot of current Americans probably don't know occured. One fellow I knew in the National Guard loved Louis Lamour, so much so that he read The Walking Drum, which is set in the Middle Ages, about which he was able to speak intelligently. Another fellow, who had been a career Marine, was reading War and Peace.
Everyone read the newspaper. You'd frequently see periodicals in people's houses, including unfortunately Playboy on occasion, but the latter had sufficiently good interviews that my high school newspaper teacher used those as examples and adopted them for the pattern of a series in that high school journal. Less unfortunately, you'd see Time, Newsweek and Life in people's houses routinely. And everyone read the local newspaper, by which I mean everyone.
The National Geographic seemed to be in the home of every household that had children, including ours. Our collection went back into the 1940s, from my father's parents home.
Cartoons didn't make much of an appearance in our house, and I"ve never developed a taste for most of the cartoon journal type of cartoons, like Superman, but what I do recall is when they showed up, it was often Mad Magazine, which actually is really adult oriented, and not in the juvenile way "adult" is often used.
The point is, when people claim people were "more educated" in the past, including populists who are not today, they tended to be, but in ways that people now just don't really quite grasp. They often had lower levels of educational achievement, but because they lived in a literate world, they were societally educated.
You can go into a lot of homes today and find that the occupants read. . . nothing.
Instead, people consume only what suits them.
In almost all of the 20th Century, it wasn't really possible to hear only the news you wanted to. Even if you limited yourself to radio, prior to the introduction of television, you were going to get a wide range of news. Newspapers were, as noted, almost a requirement for most households. When television came in, at first, it was highly local but the news was national and there was no avoiding it. You weren't going to get right or left wing propaganda from anyone.
That's all passed.
Americans aren't reading. What media they consume is self reaffirming, like Protestant sermons from the 1600s. People are listening only to like minds, and the nation is becoming more and more ignorant.
Which is why we have Donald Trump in office. No literate nation would elect him to anything.\
Note that this doesn't mean the population is dumb. Ignorant and dumb are not the same thing. But we suffer from the Jo Jo Rabbit Effect in a major way. We're listening, basically, to ourselves, and making excuses for our failures, and justifying our appetites.
And it puts the entire globe in danger.
Sunday, February 16, 2025
Lex Anteinternet: Some Grim Predications
Lex Anteinternet: Some Grim Predications:
.svg.png)
.svg.png)
.jpg)
DeGaulle's decision to pull out of Algeria lead to an internal anti DeGaulle movement inside of the French Army itself, the Organisation armée secrète. The OAS not only opposed DeGaulle's decision to leave Algeria, it tried to kill him numerous times. One such fictional attempt is the plot of the excellent book Day of the Jackal, which has been made into a movie twice.
.jpg)
Additional labels:
Some Grim Predications
“I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo."So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.”
J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
.svg.png)
I still think that Vance will be President within 18 months of the inauguration. Trump's clearly a demented, unhinged, fool who always had a defective narcissistic personality made worse by his declining mental status. It's really impossible to ignore at this point, although the damage he does will be lasting. Vance can't act immediately, as Trump put in sycophants and lackeys in his cabinet, but it's increasingly clear to non Maga Republicans that Trump's unhinged.
Indeed, Vance acting quicker than 18 months, maybe even with in the first six months, is becoming an increasing likelihood. The nation will breath a sigh of relief no matter what Vance is like, as he isn't Trump, and by that time all the dirty work of firing government employees will have been done.
But I also think I can, at this point, see some other things happening with a high degree of probability, all of which depend to some degree on what Vance ultimately does, that will result from his administration, or occur during it. Some will surprise his supporters. Here's what I think we're going to see, which the assumption being we're within the 18 month window, or perhaps that I'm wrong on that. Indeed, if I'm wrong, the likelihood of these predictions goes up.
Note that predicting these events isn't the same as cheering them on, or hoping for them, or even remotely wishing for them. What I hope and pray is that God deliver the United States and grant to it what is his will. I don't wish harm or disaster on anyone. I think, at the end of the day, that Donald Trump is a demented old fool who deserves pity, the nation that has chosen him as the Chief Executive is suffering from a sort of foolish dementia itself, and that all the proof that ever needs to be given on why people shouldn't be allowed to get massively rich has been given.
70% Chance
How solitary sits the city,
once filled with people.
She who was great among the nations
is now like a widow.
Once a princess among the provinces,
now a toiling slave.
Lamentations.
I'd give the following about a 70% chance of occurring.
Get ready for massive gun control (and worse).
.svg.png){kind=logo}
Symbol of the Freedom Caucus, um, Nazi Germany's Sturmabteilung.
Eh? With the NRA in Donny's pocket.
Yep.
The reason for this is pretty obvious. Trump has no natural affinity for firearms, although apparently his son Eric does. Trump's love for the NRA was because they loved him more than they loved their country, or anything else. The NRA was and is his tool. The NRA can thank Wayne LaPierre's leadership for that.*
But we're about to see some massive violence in American society, which gets to a couple of other predictions
Mass shootings, and by that I mean real ones, not ones where five people are shot up in a gang fight, are probably likely to break out here soon on an increased scale. Political violence is about to occur. You can't release 1,000 Brownshirts into society and not have violence break out and you can't routinely insult up to half the nation before somebody gets mad.
And sooner or later, some of that is going to be directed at Trump himself.
Of course, it already has. There's been two attempted assassinations of Trump already. That's not going to stop, it will occur again.
I'm not wishing that on him, or anyone else, but only a fool could deny that it might occur, or indeed that it will occur. The level of tension is too high in the country for this not to start playing out, and Trump is making it worse on a daily basis.
The last President this hated was Abraham Lincoln, who was perhaps ironically hated by the same people who are MAGA today. That's the last time the country was this divided, and that division resulted in John Wilkes Booth killing Lincoln. Trump isn't comparable to Lincoln in any fashion, his own demented imagination aside, except for the level of hatred they both engender, and interestingly from the same classes. It was probably nearly inevitable that somebody would take a shot at Lincoln, and it likely is the same in regard to Trump.
And frankly, like Booth going after Lincoln, the general trends fit the pattern, as do the sorts of personalities involved.
Leon Czolgosz
Leon Czolgosz killed William McKinley, whom Trump suddenly discovered, as Czolgosz was an angry unemployed anarchist and a member of a despised minority.
We're about to see a dip in the economy, which I'd guess will be a massive recession, and there are going to be a lot of angry unemployed around. For that matter, there are about to be a bunch of angry unemployed former Federal (and State) employees and we seemingly have a problem with angry semi employed veterans around right now.
.jpg)
Charles Whitman. . . he doesn't look like an unhinged killer, does he?
An angry radicalized veteran is what Lee Harvey Oswald was. Charles Whitman was also a veteran. Indeed, they'd both been Marines. The country has spent the last several decades absolutely idolizing veterans to the point where we've seen at least three mass killing performed by them and barely took notice of that fact. With the war in Afghanistan causing thousands of head injuries and a devotion to servicemen that's so profound that we excused their refusal to get vaccinated and have ignored service member presence at the January 6 insurrection, we're really setting ourselves up, something that's been amplified by the AR15 Effect.
And we're also in the process of making entire foreign and ethnic populations angry. Palestinians who naively hoped for a less pro Israel administration now have a kook who proposes to take over Gaza and make it into a sort of Club Med. Canadians openly boo the Star Spangled Banner at sporting events now every time they're held. A hockey game in Montreal this past week showed at least one American hockey player nearly in tears. The United States is experiencing a level of contempt not leveled at it since the height of the Cold War, when Communists nations and their fellow travelers displayed it. And Trump has made vague threats against Iran, which has never had a problem with murdering people.
Shirhan Sirhan.
Sirhan Bishara Sirhan was a Palestinian who had formerly adored Bobby Kennedy, we might wish to remember. The current goofball Secretary of Health and Human Services' father was running for the Presidency at the time he was murdered for his support of Israel. That was at a time when the Muslim population of the United States, and the immigrant Middle Eastern population, was quite small in comparison to what it is today. And Kennedy hadn't betrayed the misbegotten trust of an Islamic population the way Trump has. Nor did Kennedy accuse anyone of eating cats and dogs, or create an environment in which Native Americans now carry their IDs out of fear of being expelled from their own country for looking too brown.
Truman's would be killers were members of the Puerto Rican Nationalist Party, and we don't even usually think of the Puerto Ricans being all that angry.
Funny, by the way, with all the talk of adding a state, Trump doesn't mention Puerto Rico. . . I wonder why that is?
And added to that, Trump's targeted Mexican drug cartels. For years some have been convinced that John F. Kennedy was "Paddy Wacked" by the Mafia or by Irish American mobsters working for the Mafia. It seems to lack any real credibility, but if the mob had reasons to go after Kennedy, whose father had connections with bootleggers, who was going after them, surely the Mexican mobs have just as great of incentive, and frankly are much more violent.
Finally, and one that is admittedly unlikely, there are growing rumblings about a military strike on Trump.
Just the other day I saw an officer post an item which, while veiled, clearly argued that his fellow officers needed to be prepared to disobey illegal orders, basically like the members of the U.S. Attorney's Office in New York just did. Okay, that's one thing. But then this past week I saw outright cries, from civilians, that the military oath to protect the country from foreign and domestic enemies applies to Trump, as he's a domestic, and maybe, a foreign enemy.
He may in fact be a foreign enemy, I'd note. We've raised it here before, but now Time's raising it.
It is perfectly possible that Trump is a knowing Russian agent, in which case there's some sort of duty for somebody to do something, if not actually what's being urged. On this we might note that the Army kept the Venona Files for decades before anyone knew it, and didn't really trust Franklin Roosevelt to know the truth about what was in it. The Venona Files revealed that the U.S. Army was aware that people like Alger Hiss were Soviet spies, they just didn't feel they could get any traction on it, and for that matter Whitaker Chamber's efforts to enlighted FDR outright failed. The point is that the service, if Trump is a paid or compromised Russian agent, may very well know it, but be afraid at this point to act on it. I wouldn't blame them for being afraid.
But, if that's the case, and of course we don't know that it is, it's worth noting that officers will act independently if they feel they have no choice or are obligated to. That's what nearly caused the US and the USSR to nearly go to war over Berlin. The officer in charge lacked clear instructions and was headed to war with the Soviets on one occasion when JFK was President before the clear instructions came in. If the Service is stilling around with information that Trump is simply a Russian tool, and to an outside observer there's plenty of circumstantial evidence that he may very well be, it's not impossible that the service, or the CIA, might actually act.
Of course, the fact that Trump is still living is pretty good evidence that neither the military or the CIA actually have anything of this type on him or he'd already be dead. If they had something, they probably would have done something by now.
On this topic, however, we might recall France.
France's politics became enormously polarized before World War Two, much like are own are, right now. World War Two made the French far right ascendant. Petain would have recognized the Project 2025 crowd pretty easily. The Second World War put the French far right sort of in the trash can, from which its never emerged, but French politics didn't return to normal for decades. One of the thing that occured in that context is that France fought two bitter colonial wars, one in Indochina and another in Algeria, in the decade following the Second World War.
The OAS was bitter about leaving Algeria, and not really happy about what happened in Indochina. Of course, Algeria was an overseas department of France, so giving it up is sort of loosely analogous to leaving American Samoa or perhaps Puerto Rico, so the analay is strained.
Having said that, it was Donald Trump, not Joe Biden, who surrendered to the Taliban, something that Trump's deluded followers were easily distracted from, including those followers who served in Afghanistan. But the fact remains we shed blood and then left, and now have a large population of veterans who served there.
And Trump is imperiling our relationship with Taiwan. "Losing" China in the 1940s, is what caused the Republican Party of that era to be shaken out of its foreign policy slumber and lead directly to the McCarthy Era, which saw the first expressions of something resembling what we're now seeing, point being, if we "lose" Taiwan, it's going to shake something up.
And Trump's course seems likely to lead us from withdrawing to an 85 year commitment to the security of Europe.
None of this means a military coup or an internal strike on the Presidency is going to happen, but all of it does put the overall violent situation that Trump has fostered into a very strange position. Men who have spent 30 years dedicated to defending the West might not really take it that well if they're told to cozy up to a side they know to be the enemy.
What would happen if the military actually acted in this fashion? I think we'd see far right riots for about a week, and that's about it. Most of the far right is a pack of paper tigers. Faced with a military action, or an action by a limited number of servicemen, they'll just accept it as the right thing to do and claim they were for it all along.
Back to civilian actors.
If all this seems far fetched, I've already seen two barely veiled calls for assassination on Blue Sky or Twitter. People outright hoping somebody will kill Trump. During the Super Bowl I heard several people either outright note what an assassination opportunity it was, or in the words of one person "what a John Wilkes Booth moment."
So where does this lead, if it happens?
If Trump survives the next attempt, he'll slap down an executive order banning wide classes of long arms and handguns, as well as orders massively curtailing civil liberties. My guess is that most semi automatic long arms will be outright banned. If Trump asks Congress to do it, the Democrats are already all in, and the dog like GOP will do exactly what Trump wants. He'll probably simply ban handguns as well.
And, as noted, he'll curtail civil liberties. In that sense, such a thing would be a gift to him.
And there's a good chance he'll do that when the next big mass shooting occurs. It's probably already being worked out.
And what's the risk to him? It's not like the NRA is going to suddenly turn its back on somebody they fanatically worshipped. Hitler, to a degree, turned on the SA, but they didn't turn on him. The NRA will roll over like a dog and come out for whatever he asks for.
If Trump doesn't survive, mass violence will break out in the Populist Storm Trooper camp who will blame the murder on the fantastical "deep state". They already believe they're freedom's vanguard in this fashion. J. D. Vance will use the event to declare an emergency and then he'll do the same thing. That will last for about a week, as noted, until Vance declares all is well.
Indeed, William McKinley, whom Trump so adores, provides an example. McKinley's Vice President was Theodore Roosevelt, who many in the GOP feared as a dangerous radical. Roosevelt wasted no time making the government his own. The Trumpite lackeys and Elon Musk will be shown the door, and we'll have National Conservatism, like it or not, and whether or not anyone voted for it.
The upcoming marginalization of Evangelical Christianity.
It's overdue anyhow.
The theological underpinnings of Evangelical Christianity are too thin to withstand any sort of examination by anyone who cares to do it and a Christian religion that basically holds that anything you can do is okay, as long as you do it with a member of the opposite sex, is not very Christian. But the linking of the anti democratic populist far right with Evangelical Christianity will be something that it can't endure when things blow up in this Administration's face, and that is going to happen.
Mike Johnson with his smarmy smile, and Trump closed eyed as if he is in deep thought will be what people remember when they lose their jobs and have no place to go. Health and Wealth Christianity, which is contrary to the Gospel, won't have a long shelf life when you are poor and sick and somebody on television is yelling at you. People who voted for Trump as he was "Godly" won't remember that when they're lining up for assistance that isn't there, and Musk has gone on to have five more children with three more concubines.
When the bloom is off the rose of populism, Evangelical Christianity is going to tank.
The bad thing, I suppose, is that a lot of people leaving it will just leave religion altogether.
We'll have troops coming home in body bags within a year.
I don't know from where, or when, but we will. This administration is too reckless not to get troops killed, and when inflation creeps up over 7%, which is only months away, it'll need a distraction. Nothing distracts like war.
Trump has found plenty of countries to pick on. My overall guess, however, is that he'll pick on one that seems like it can't do much, or he'll pick a fight with Iran, which really can. A war against Iran is one that we frankly can't win, as wars end when the people you attack decide they're over. The Iranians are never going to agree that we beat them.
If I'm right, the irony will be that there will be dead Americans coming home for decades, and frankly they'll be blood right here on our shores. Iran has no problem with waging a terror campaign right here, and that will itself spark a bunch of civil repression here in the US.
The United States will return to democracy, but we'll be irreparably harmed.
The populists had and continue to have a real point about rule by unelected officials. There's been complaints about that for decades. The complainers didn't understand what they were complaining about, which was the rise of a large Federal government from 1932 on, and ironically a lot of the complainers will be the fist to suffer as agencies shrink. When people in the Trump camp can't get Medicaid, and a lot of them are receiving it, or drive on pothole filled highways, they'll be getting exactly what they deserve.
But only 50% of the country was in the Trump camp during the election and only a fraction of them are hardcore. The country will come back.
But it won't be the same. Much of the damage will be permanent and those who voted for it should be reminded of it every year for the rest of their lives.
People believed that Trump was going to take on government waste, and some still believe it. Mostly he's just cutting. Trump and Musk are very wealthy men born into wealth. For them, people suffering economic deprivation is an abstraction.
The US will be eclipsed as a major power
Flag of the European Union, which may be about to eclipse us as a the Western power people listen to.
The US really entered the world stage with World War One. Under Trump, we're stepping off.
That is in fact what a lot of people want, they just don't want comes next. The world now will be a bipolar one, with the European Community standing for what the US did, and China being its main opponent (but read below). We'll dance to their tune. People who thought that Trump was going to make America great again will find that it has become just a second rate power with none, and I mean none, of the claimed things that were going to be achieved, achieved.
There's always been an element of this in American thought. There were those who were opposed to even getting ready for the Second World War. The US entered World War One when German ambitions began to hurt us to the extent we could ignore them. After World War Two the GOP went isolationist again rapidly until it began to hurt us pretty quickly.
Going isolationist again will hurt us, and quickly. I think, as noted, it'll get us in a major war with China, Russia and South Korea. The difference this time is that we're hated worldwide. We'll fight a lot of that on our own, and badly.
If there's an upside to this, and I don't really think that there is, it appears to be that Europe is going to resume its traditional role as the dominant Western force. Americans, for the first time in decades, are going to have to get used to being also rans. In fact, in this context, it might be for the first time in US history where we basically have a seat at the children's table and nobody pays that much attention to us as we're not adults. In a way, that's a lesson that we failed to learn somewhere and its time to learn it. Time to grow up.
If that's correct, and it seems likely that the National Conservatives are panicking it is, as they're sending Musk and Vance to try to lecture Europeans, it'll mean that much of the the external things National Conservatives are working on won't matter. The US view on climate change, won't matter. US tax policies, won't matter.
We'll basically be like what Brazil current is, in regard to the rest of the world.
On a related item, within a few years of Trump's death, which will be soon anyway you look at it, he'll be such a despised figure in American history that his grave will be a frequent target of vandalism. The government won't really bother, after a time, to guard it. He'll be held in contempt, including by those who now fanatically worship him. Americans will regard those who voted for him as contemptible fools, including the majority of people who voted for him, who won't admit that they did so.
50% Chance
Let all their evil come before you
and deal with them
As you have so ruthlessly dealt with me
for all my rebellions.
My groans are many,
my heart is sick.
Lamentations.
Some more remote possibilities, but not all that remote
We'll be in a type of world war.
Chinese poster from 1971. The Chinese have long memories. Americans have the memories of gnats.
And I don't mean figuratively, I mean actually.
Somewhere around here is a post that predicted, at the time it was posted, that we would be at war with China within, I thought, about five years. We aren't at that mark yet.
China wants Taiwan and have been openly planning to invade it for years. The Biden Administration was fairly openly planning on the defense of Taiwan. Japan and the Philippines expect it to occur as well.
Trump is now punishing Taiwan economically, and China is going to move to get it. The Chinese are not dumb, and my guess is that they don't figure that Trump will be around long either.
North Korean Army poster. North Korea is desperate, and it undoubtedly regards Trump as a complete doofus.
Trump's a demented doofus who is destroying the American government. This would be the ideal time for China to act. And if they do, and I think they will, North Korea will attack South Korea shortly thereafter. Whatever has gone on or is occuring in Eastern Europe, Russia will launch a massive fully mobilized campaign against Ukraine, and maybe the Balkans and Poland. You can easily see a scenario where China attacks Taiwan and North Korea attacks South Korea later that same week, and Russia has a major offensive occuring within a month.
Russian poster equating the Russian invasion of Ukraine with the Soviet victory in World War Two.
Indeed, if I led China, and the morals of the Chinese leadership, I'd do it. The balance of risks is on their sides, and will even be more on their sides after Elon Musk takes the meat cleaver to the military.
What will Trump do? Probably babble and vacillate. He'll yap for about a week on the basis that world leaders listen to him. After a week, the situation will be grave for Taiwan and we'll be in an all out war in South Korea. We'll act then, but we'll have lost a week which means when we do, we're going to take a naval pounding.
Trump, it might be noted, didn't answer his country's call when it came in Vietnam. Musk managed not to be conscripted into the South African Army by migrating to Canada.
I think our chances of winning such a war are very slim.
A war like that isn't avoidable and we'll get in it. Probably with Vance as head of state as Trump's escorted out the door babbling.
Trump's going to defy the courts
Napoleon, who claimed he was acting to save the country and went on to get a lot of people killed. Don quoted him just the other day in what is likely a prelude to ignoring the courts. Napoleon ended up in exile and was likely murdered by poisoning.
This is pretty obvious and will happen soon.
The thing is, this won't go well, and will prove to be one of those things he'll move away from quickly. Courts have a lot more power than they did in times past and they really aren't afraid of Trump. Once Federal Marshall start slapping people in prison or impounding assets, things will change.
40% Chance
Trump's revealed to be an active Russian asset.
Whitaker Chambers warned for years the US government had been penetrated by Soviet agents and was widely derided. Turns out, he was right. Chambers also did not expect democracy to be able to prevail against Communism.
There's no doubt that Trump is a Russian asset. Indeed, there's no doubt that he's working out great for Russia, the question still remains why.
There has always been something really odd here that people just haven't been able to pin down. He could just love Russia because he does, but he could be dancing to their tune as they have something on him.
If the Russians do have something on him, things can only be kept secret so long. Trump has a lot of enemies including people he now thinks are his friends. What does Musk know that hte rest of us don't?
What does the CIA and the military, or MI6?
And what does Putin?
When Putin dies, and he's an old man himself, things could suddenly change in Russia and the information open up. Or somebody else could reveal it. If it breaks open, MAGA will deny it. Indeed, there are still Democrats who pretend Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, and the Rosenbergs weren't working for the Soviets. But with enough evidence, famously fickle American public opinion can turn, and suddenly.
What Trump holds on politicos opens up.
.jpg)
There are somethings in the political world that are frankly just too weird right now not to have a backstory.
It can't possibly be the case that every Republican in Congress does what Trump wants as they love him. Not hardly. And it can't be that they all do it as they feel its for their long time gain with the voters.
Politics have always been dirty and people carry secrets around with them. William G. Harding was screwing his assistant in the White House and had a prior mistress who was probably a World War One German spy. Franklin Roosevelt carried on a very long lasting affair. John F. Kennedy had the morals of an alley cat and bedded Mimi Alford in the White House when she was still a teen, or barely out of her teens.
Some of the people in Congress are compromised somehow. Some probably have received money illegally, some from illegal sources, and Trump knows about it. Some probably have turgid affairs with minors, non spouses, and members of the same sex that would kill their careers if it was revealed and Trump or his minions know about that. My guess is that in the next couple of years we should brace ourselves for lots of these stories, with lots of recognizable names.
A new conservative party will emerge
Emblem of the Progressive Party which nearly replaced the GOP.
It is, quite frankly, a perfect time for one.
There's been attempts at this for years, but now the time is ripe, as there isn't one. The Republican Party isn't a conservative party at all, it's a populist party. The National Conservative element of it isn't either, it's a Francoist contingent.
This has happened in the US before. The GOP itself came about when the Whigs collapsed. And the Progressives made a good run at the GOP for several years in a row. Had Taft bailed out of the his race with Roosevelt, there's be no Republican Party today, and frankly the Democrats would be the conservative party.
The elements of it are already there. Quite a few Republicans who had been figures lately in the GOP and backed out remain there and are active. Some Republican members of Congress, such as Lisa Murkowski, consistently talk out of both sides of their mouths about Trump. Some more cowardly Republicans in high office will privately voice the opinion that he's bat shit crazy, and then go on to support him in public.
All it really takes is enough people with conservative views to actually unite, which is easier said than done. Having said that, intelligent conservatives are disgusted by much of which is branded as conservatism today, and yet can take advantage of Elon Musk and his band of meat cleaver juveniles to do much of their dirty work for them.
None of these are pleasant
Winston Churchill noted that in the 1930s he felt like a "voice crying in the wilderness" about the dangers of Hitler. He didn't want World War Two to come, he was trying to do what he could to get ready for it or prevent it.
I feel the same way here. None of these are things I wish to happen. I'm pretty certain that some of them shall.
Ironically, all of them are avoidable, but only with great difficulty at this point. The people surrounding Trump are, by and large, small minded and unhinged. He doesn't like to hear from people who don't agree with him, which makes him a weak person. Intelligent people, which I do not feel Trump is, can listen to different views and weigh them. He can't.
Given that, really avoiding these outcomes would require somebody to act now. If there's somebody close to Trump who can give him the dope slap, which appears unlikely, that might be a means. More likely, however, it will require something external.
The most obvious external thing would be invoking the 25th Amendment. That would require, as a practical matter, a vote of 2/3s of both houses, which is almost impossible to imagine right now. If things go very badly over the next two years, however, it's a possibility. A much bigger possibility, I'd note, is that Vance boots Trump out in a little under 18 months, but if I'm right about much of this, it'll be too late to avert disaster by then.
That's a possibility, however, which if I were the Chinese I'd weigh. Which is why, if I led China, I'd attack Taiwan within the year.
There's a small chance that disaster can be averted if the Democrats, which move at the speed of the Baby Boomers, can get their act together and launch an all out assault on the GOP. So far, they're not doing it. Some of that will have to be at the state level. California and New York basically have the ability to cripple the Federal government if they wish to, and both are really Democratic states.
Remember, LORD, what has happened to us,
pay attention, and see our disgrace:
Our heritage is turned over to strangers,
our homes, to foreigners.a
We have become orphans, without fathers;
our mothers are like widows.
We pay money to drink our own water,
our own wood comes at a price.
With a yoke on our necks, we are driven;
we are worn out, but allowed no rest.
We extended a hand to Egypt and Assyria,
to satisfy our need of bread.
Our ancestors, who sinned, are no more;
but now we bear their guilt.
Servants rule over us,
with no one to tear us from their hands.
We risk our lives just to get bread,
exposed to the desert heat;
Our skin heats up like an oven,
from the searing blasts of famine.c
Women are raped in Zion,
young women in the cities of Judah;
Princes have been hanged by them,
elders shown no respect.
Young men carry millstones,
boys stagger under loads of wood;
The elders have abandoned the gate,
the young men their music.
The joy of our hearts has ceased,
dancing has turned into mourning;
The crown has fallen from our head:
woe to us that we sinned!
Because of this our hearts grow sick,
at this our eyes grow dim:
Because of Mount Zion, lying desolate,
and the jackals roaming there!
But you, LORD, are enthroned forever;
your throne stands from age to age.
*Why have you utterly forgotten us,
forsaken us for so long?
Bring us back to you, LORD, that we may return:
renew our days as of old.
For now you have indeed rejected us
and utterly turned your wrath against us.
Lamentations
I hope I'm wrong about all of this.
Footnotes
*LaPierre is yet another hawkish boomer who managed not to serve in Vietnam, first due to a student, and then due to a medical, deferment. He's also another Catholic raised person who divorced and remarried, a betrayal of what Catholics believe.
Why do I note this?
I'm finding more and more that people who can set aside serious religious vows can set aside anything.
Related threads:
Some election predictions.
Labels: 2020s, 2024, 2024 Election, 2026, J. D. Vance, Joseph Biden, Kamala Harris, Lying, National Conservatism, Predictions
Labels: Court, Espionage, European Community, France, Napoleon Bonaparte, North Korea, Russia, Russo Ukrainian War, South Korea, The Madness of King Donald, Third Parties, War, World War Three, Central Intelligence Agency, China, Military, National Conservatism, New Apostolic Reformation, Organisation armée secrète, People's Republic of China, Protestant, religion, Russia, Taiwan, William McKinley
Wednesday, February 5, 2025
Sunday, January 26, 2025
Lex Anteinternet: The American "Christian" Civil Religion meets real Christianity, and doesn't like it.
Lex Anteinternet: The American "Christian" Civil Religion meets real...:
Either result is really scary.
The American "Christian" Civil Religion meets real Christianity, and doesn't like it.
Episcopal Bishop Budde
You shall treat the alien who resides with you no differently than the natives born among you; have the same love for him as for yourself; for you too were once aliens in the land of Egypt.
Leviticus 19:33-34.
This comes out on a Sunday morning.
Faithful Catholics are going to Mass today, as required by the Church, or went last night. These are the readings for the day, which will also be read in some "main line" Protestant Churches that use the Catholic lectionary:
Reading 1
Nehemiah 8:2-4a, 5-6, 8-10
Ezra the priest brought the law before the assembly, which consisted of men, women, and those children old enough to understand.
Standing at one end of the open place that was before the Water Gate, he read out of the book from daybreak till midday, in the presence of the men, the women, and those children old enough to understand; and all the people listened attentively to the book of the law.
Ezra the scribe stood on a wooden platform that had been made for the occasion.
He opened the scroll so that all the people might see it— for he was standing higher up than any of the people —; and, as he opened it, all the people rose.
Ezra blessed the LORD, the great God, and all the people, their hands raised high, answered, "Amen, amen!" Then they bowed down and prostrated themselves before the LORD, their faces to the ground. Ezra read plainly from the book of the law of God, interpreting it so that all could understand what was read. Then Nehemiah, that is, His Excellency, and Ezra the priest-scribe and the Levites who were instructing the people said to all the people: "Today is holy to the LORD your God. Do not be sad, and do not weep"— for all the people were weeping as they heard the words of the law. He said further: "Go, eat rich foods and drink sweet drinks, and allot portions to those who had nothing prepared; for today is holy to our LORD. Do not be saddened this day, for rejoicing in the LORD must be your strength!"
Reading 2
1 Corinthians 12:12-30
Brothers and sisters: As a body is one though it has many parts, and all the parts of the body, though many, are one body, so also Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or free persons, and we were all given to drink of one Spirit.
Now the body is not a single part, but many. If a foot should say, "Because I am not a hand I do not belong to the body, "it does not for this reason belong any less to the body. Or if an ear should say, "Because I am not an eye I do not belong to the body, " it does not for this reason belong any less to the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole body were hearing, where would the sense of smell be? But as it is, God placed the parts, each one of them, in the body as he intended. If they were all one part, where would the body be? But as it is, there are many parts, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, "I do not need you, " nor again the head to the feet, "I do not need you." Indeed, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are all the more necessary, and those parts of the body that we consider less honorable we surround with greater honor, and our less presentable parts are treated with greater propriety, whereas our more presentable parts do not need this.
But God has so constructed the body as to give greater honor to a part that is without it, so that there may be no division in the body, but that the parts may have the same concern for one another. If one part suffers, all the parts suffer with it; if one part is honored, all the parts share its joy.
Now you are Christ's body, and individually parts of it. Some people God has designated in the church to be, first, apostles; second, prophets; third, teachers; then, mighty deeds; then gifts of healing, assistance, administration, and varieties of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work mighty deeds? Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?
Gospel
Luke 1:1-4; 4:14-21
Since many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning and ministers of the word have handed them down to us, I too have decided, after investigating everything accurately anew, to write it down in an orderly sequence for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may realize the certainty of the teachings you have received.
Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news of him spread throughout the whole region. He taught in their synagogues and was praised by all.
He came to Nazareth, where he had grown up, and went according to his custom into the synagogue on the sabbath day. He stood up to read and was handed a scroll of the prophet Isaiah. He unrolled the scroll and found the passage where it was written: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring glad tidings to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, and to proclaim a year acceptable to the Lord. Rolling up the scroll, he handed it back to the attendant and sat down, and the eyes of all in the synagogue looked intently at him.
He said to them, "Today this Scripture passage is fulfilled in your hearing."
Faithful Orthodox using a different calendar will hear three readings as well, those being John 20:19-31, 1 Timothy 1:15-17 and Matthew 15:21-28.
Donald and Melania Trump, and their son Barron, aren't going to hear any readings today, as they're not going to Church. Melania is a non observant Catholic (her marriage to Donald Trump is invalid in the eyes of the Church) and Trump is from all observances non religious, in spite of Evangelicals having proclaimed him, with no evidence to support it, a man of God.
I find myself in a peculiar situation, in that as a Catholic who firmly believes that Episcopal holy orders are "completely null and utterly void", I'm rising to defend an Episcopal Bishop, and moreover one that I don't really know about in general.1
Moreover, as a Catholic who also believes that women may not be ordained to the priesthood, I'm rising to defend a female Episcopal cleric.
And in doing this, I'm recalling a homily delivered by a local young, highly orthodox, Catholic priest, that the being the "four things God hates homily".Let's start off by recalling that, highlighting the part that applies here:
The Four Things.
Because I've referenced it more than one time, but apparently never posted it (cowardice at work) I'm going to post here the topic of "the four sins God hates". I'm also doing this as I'm getting to a political thread about this years elections and the candidates, in the context of the argument of "Christians must. . . " or "Christians can. . . "
First I'll note using the word "hate", in the context of the Divine, is a truncation for a much larger concept. "Condemns" might have been a better choice of words, but then making an effective delivery in about ten minutes or less is tough, and truncations probably hit home more than other things.
Additionally, and very importantly, sins and sinners are different. In Christian theology, and certainly in Catholic theology, God loves everyone, including those who have committed any one of these sins, or all of them.
This topic references a remarkably short and effective sermon I heard some time ago. The way my 61 year old brain now works, that probably means it was a few years ago. At any rate, it was a homily based on all three of the day's readings, which is remarkable in and of itself, and probably left every member of the parish squirming a bit. It should have, as people entrenched in their views politically and/or economically would have had to found something to disagree with, or rather be hit by.
The first sin was an easy one that seemingly everyone agrees is horrific, but which in fact people excuse continually, murder.
Murder is of course the unjust taking of a life, and seemingly nobody could disagree with that being a horrific sin. But in fact, we hear people excuse the taking of innocent life all the time. Abortion is the taking of an innocent life. Even "conservatives", however, and liberals as a false flag, will being up "except in the case of rape and incest".
Rape and incest are horrific sins in and of itself, but compounding it with murder doesn't really make things go away, but rather makes one horror into two. Yes, bearing a child in these circumstances would be a horrific burden. Killing the child would be too.
The second sin the Priest noted was sodomy. He noted it in the readings and in spite of what people might like to say, neither the Old or New Testaments excuse unnatural sex. They just don't. St. Paul is particularly open about this, so much so that a local female lesbian minister stated that this was just "St. Paul's opinion", which pretty much undercuts the entire Canon of Scripture.
A person can get into Natural Law from here, which used to be widely accepted, and which has been cited by a United States Supreme Court justice as recently as fifty or so years ago, and the Wyoming Supreme Court more recently than that, and both in this context, but we'll forgo that in depth here. Suffice it to say that people burdened with such desires carry a heavy burden to say the least, but that doesn't make it a natural inclination. In the modern Western World we've come to excuse most such burdens, however, so that where we now draw lines is pretty arbitrary.
Okay, those are two "conservative" items.
The next wasn't.
That was mistreating immigrants.
This sort of speaks for itself, but there it is. Scripture condemns mistreating immigrants. You can't go around, as a Christian, hating immigrants or abusing them because of their plight.
Abusing immigrants, right now, seems to be part of the Conservative "must do" list.
And the final one was failing to pay workmen a just wage. Not exactly taking the natural economy/free market approach in the homily.
Two conservatives, and two liberal.
That's because Christianity is neither liberal or conservative, but Christianity. People claiming it for their political battles this year might well think out their overall positions.
.png)
As I noted, two conservative items, and two liberal.
No murdering, no sodomy, no abusing immigrants, and no cheating people on their pay.
A homily nearly guaranteed to make everyone uncomfortable or angry.
Seems like everyone claiming to carry some sort of Christian banner in the deep Trump camp is only comfortable with one of those, now days.2
Bishop Budde directly addressed Donald Trump, and for that matter J. D. Vance. You may have read what she said, but invoking the Jimmy Akin Citation Rule, you'll let you hear it for yourself.
This is homily is profoundly Christian. There's nothing in it that any Christian can condemn. So why are people condemning it.
Well, because it is profoundly Christian. She asks for mercy for the different, downtrodden, and immigrants.
Gasp!
Donald Trump, who is trying to yank citizenship from the "natural born", is taking exception to a Christian cleric's plea for mercy for everyone his policies impact.3 4 Of course, he also ignored her comments about calling people names, accusing her of not being "smart", a frequent accusation by Trump (who might not be comfortable with his own smarts).
Well, this gets directly at the hypocrisy of some supporters of Trump who continually evoke religion, and particularly those who are in a certain evangelical camp.
For years now, we've been told by these people, including a fair number of clerics, that Trump, who has no discernable connection to any religion as an adult, doesn't seem to practice any religion, who is a serial polygamist with a horrific history towards women, and who is a member of the class that Christ warned less of a chance of getting to Heaven than a camel through an "eye of a needle", was a "Godly man".
This has been a complete fraud. There's no evidence that Trump is religious. He attended Church only fourteen times during his first term of office. He was confirmed a Presbyterian when he was young, a denomination he says he's no longer part of, but John Calvin would give him a dope slap for his personal conduct if he came back from the grave.5
What they really mean is they see him as somebody who going to restore and invoke a certain John Brown view of muscular evangelical Christianity. Their religion is heavily mixed with right wing politics, and they see themselves as leading a march out of a metaphorical immoral Kansas.6 Trump is just, in their view, a God sent vehicle to get this done.
Put another way, as I've mentioned before, they see Trump as a sort of Cyrus the Great.7 They don't care that he isn't a Christian, as he's going to back their "Christian values".
And their values, frankly, express a deficit of Christianity.
This is something we've seen before in the United States and it dates back, really, to the country being a protestant nation founded by migrating, and often dissenting, protestant sects. If you looked at the "Pilgrims", for example, they really weren't all that nice. Oliver Cromwell's Calvinism formed a background to a lot of the early religious history of the US, and Cromwell definitely wasn't nice. Indeed, he ended up being so hated in his own country that the location of his head remains a secret, something imposed to prevent people from digging it up in anger.
In the past, Southern "evangelicals" were often backers of segregation. Carrying forward to the current times, they see many of the descents from Christian moral standards, such as the intrusion of homosexuality into society in general and the pulpit in particular, as abominations. At the same time, however, they continue to see things that they've widely accommodated as not much of a problem, at least not openly. You aren't going to hear, for example, any evangelicals condemn divorce. Locally I know at least two people who "lived in sin" and were really active members of a major evangelical church. I've sort of known one person carrying the banner of Christian morality who is married to a divorced woman who is herself extremely right wing, which while common in the US, is something Christ specifically prohibited.
You really don't get the pick and choose option here.
The New Apostolic Reformation has embraced Trump in spades. They feel that he'll, to put it in an old fashioned fashion, drive the Sodomites from the land and restore and impose a Evangelical Christian order. A lot of them seem perfectly comfortable with policies that will hurt, at a human level, a group of people who are largely darked skinned, even if they don't hold personally racist views.
To be perfectly fair, a lot of American Catholics, completely dim on the nature of the New Apostolic Reformation, are going right along with this and supporting it, so we are far, far from being free of accusation here ourselves.7b
That fact in and of itself will have some infesting implications. The Episcopal Church is a "main line" Protestant religion that was once a major force in the country, but which accommodated itself to an ever growing list of things Christians have always considered sinful. In the 1930s the Anglican Communion remained so close to Christian tradition, and close the Apostolic Christian tradition at that, that it caused a king to resign his thrown over divorce. Now it doesn't worry much about divorce and is okay, in many places with homosexual "marriage". Hence the accusation of "woke" aimed at the Bishop, even though she did not say a single thing that could be regarded as being woke in her homily.
I note this as Hispanics have come into the country they have been attracted to protestant and quasi Christian faiths in some numbers. This isn't hugely surprising, even though the majority of Hispanics are cultural, if not practicing, Catholics, as these faiths seem more "American". It's notable that in the novel, but not the movie adaptation of it, The Godfather Michael Corleone figure was disappointed when his protestant wife converted to Catholicism and started raising the children in that faith, as he hoped that they'd be members of the more "American", at that time, Episcopal Church. Indeed, Catholics aspiring to be in the upper middle class in fact often did that until the 1960s, when Kennedy made being American and Catholic seemingly okay.8
In reality, it never actually became okay, as the Church will not accommodate itself to the culture of anyone nation, something that became increasingly obvious after 1973's Roe v. Wade decision.
It's been noted that Hispanics voted for Trump in large numbers this last election, a shift in political alignments that we predicated here quite awhile back. That reflects their cultural conservatism, which is to say that it reflects their cultural Catholicism.9 What they probably were not ready for is the degree of outright hatred a significant number of the Maga crowed have to anyone who isn't a White nominal protestant. This started to become evident when Anne Coulter, a serious Presbyterian told Vivek Ramaswamy recently that she'd vote for him, but he isn't white. Indeed, he's an Indian American Hindu. Ramaswamy got the message and bailed out of the doggy agency, realizing that there was no future for him there. He's going to run for the Governorship of Rust Belt Ohio where voters will likely inform him that he's not white, as its okay apparently to say that once again.
Indeed, there are a lot of under the breath mutterings about Usha Vance who isn't white, and who is a Hindu. Oh my.
Chances are good that the Trump interregnum will have an impact on the Evangelicals in a major way, starting with this. There isn't really a home in a lot of those churches for Christians who hail from a culture that didn't arise in Great Britain during the English Civil War. When the disaster of Trump blows up, it's going to take the wind out of the sails of a lot of things associated with his movement, and most likely a lot of Hispanics out of the pews.
To be a real Christian, of course, has always meant that you didn't have a home in the world, and it still does. It has also always meant that you'd be hated. People want to hear that they can get rich on Earth and that its a sign of approval from Heaven. They want to hear that some people don't really count, up to the point of their deaths, whether that be through neglect or judicial execution. They want to be told that unnatural sexual unions are hated by God, but shacking up and affairs, as long as the plumbing is correct, aren't really a big deal. They want to be told they can pay as little to their employees as they can get away with, and that's just God's plan. And they want to be told they can hate the stranger, even the infant ones, if they weren't born in the right place.
They want "Christian values", as long a they weren't the ones Christians were martyerd for, and they're easy to do. They're okay with the Sermon on the Mount, as long as it doesn't mean they really have to go to Church to hear it, and can stay home and watch football.
Now, does this apply to all Evangelicals? Certainly not, and not by a long shot. About 80% of white Evangelicals voted for Trump, but not all of them hold such views by any means. 58% of Catholics voted for Trump, that being a majority. A lot of that may be explained in both instances by Democrats hugging the bloody body of abortion, which should be a lesson to them and one which we warned here was a mistake to do. And quite frankly much of what has come about was due to the developments brought about by Obergefell, which we warned would occur.10
So, horrified by a moral decay that became obvious with Obergefell, but having accommodated itself to a flood of moral decay that came before that, the American Civil Religion turned to an irreligious man who has no capacity for deep thought at all and who started whining, but only after some of his backers whined first, that a "woke" minister was interjecting religion into politics.
Politics and morality are inseparable. And as morality's foundation is religion, religion and politics are necessarily related. We need religion as a guide. We need it because we are imperfect, and our government needs the church, because only those humble enough to admit they're sinners can bring to democracy the tolerance it requires in order to survive.
Ronald Reagan.
Footnotes:
1. The phrase is from Pope Leo XIII's encyclical Apostolicae Curae holding Anglican ordinations to be invalid.
I'm not hostile to Episcopalians, I'd note, I just agree that Pope Leo XIII was correct. Apparently a lot of Episcopalians have over the years as there's been efforts to convey validity by cross ordinations from other churches that can demonstrate Apostolic succession, something the Methodist have done as well. Some Anglican male priests do have valid holy orders, however, particularly if they were formerly Catholics.
2. Trump reinstated the death penal for certain Federal offenses. The Catholic Church generally takes the view that its obsolete and while the state is allowed to impose it under certain conditions, those conditions no longer exist in the modern world.
3. This is clearly a legally deficient argument and has been stayed by a court.
4. Of interest, already there's been arguments that Trump's proclamation also deprives Native Americans of citizenship, a nasty shocking proposition. This because Trump's AG office holds the view that birthright means "subject to the jurisdiction" of the US.
Of interest, if that's correct, Ted Cruz is not a U.S. citizen. He was born in Canada.
5. Presbyterians do allow for divorce, as a last resort, in cases of adultery, which Trump has experience with, or abandonment.
6. Catholics that have been backing this best fear, as this camp is traditionally highly hostile to Catholicism, and many of its members wouldn't regard Catholics as Christians at all, even though Catholics are the original Christians.
7. This analogy really fails. Cyrus the Great wasn't a bad man, in the context of his times and station. He wasn't Jewish, and of course he lived well before the time of Christ, but he was charged with freeing the captive Jews under his dominion.
That's why some Evangelical Christians see Trump as a Cyrus. Cyrus enormously benefitted the Jew, but he wasn't Jewish. So, to those in the New Apostolic Reformation, Trump will be a Cyrus who lets them bring forth a new Evangelical Protestant nation.
Well, Cyrus would regard Trump as a pussy. Moreover, Trump is just making us look like clowns and stands a much better chance of tainting Evangelical Christianity irredeemably.
7b. Having said that,yanking the citizenship of the native born was the topic of an address by Catholic Cardinal Cupich.
Blog Mirror: Remarks of Cardinal Blase Cupich, archbishop of Chicago, regarding immigration at the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico City
He's not alone in this. Other US Catholic bishops have made statements on this issue, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops condemned Trump's actions on immigration as well.
The Church does not maintain there should be "open borders", as some on the far left do. Rather, it holds that immigration should be governed by four principles:
First Principle: People have the right to migrate to sustain their lives and the lives of their families.
Second Principle: A country has the right to regulate its borders and to control immigration.
Third Principle: A country must regulate its borders with justice and mercy.
8. There was also a trend like this that followed World War Two with some returning US servicemen joining the (ironically) Lutheran Church as well as the Episcopal Church which seemed more American and local.
While widely missed, there's a counter trend today with young conservatives and traditionalist joining the Catholic and Orthodox churches, and some very devout Evangelicals joining the Orthodox Church after being exposed to the early history of the Church.
9. I've already seen one video clip by a Hispanic Trump voter horrified over the deportations, claiming he promised to do no such thing.
No he didn't. But this is an interesting example of how people convince themselves a politician holds their own views because he holds some views that they like.
10. We specifically stated: These justices have perhaps assumed too much if they've assumed that they can now act so far that Marshall would be horrified, and I'd be surprised if, long term, this decision doesn't either mark the beginning of a Cesarian court and a retreat of American democracy, or the point at which the roles of the Court began to massively erode in favor of a more Athenian democracy.
Either result is really scary.
Related threads:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Lex Anteinternet: World Happiness Report 2025
Lex Anteinternet: World Happiness Report 2025 : World Happiness Report 2025 Read it and weep MAGA. Mexico is a happier country than the...
-
Lex Anteinternet: Hoarding bananas. : Hoarding bananas. This isn't really correct. Frankly, the other monkeys would take the hoarded ba... -
Lex Anteinternet: How not to be helpful. : How not to be helpful. I hesitate to post this, and probably shouldn't. I'm not a couns...
-
The Agrarian's Lament: Blog Update. New Feature. : Blog Update. New Feature. We have added a "pages" feature to this blog....
