This is a post worth reading (including of course the original source post by Tony Bragalia) if for no other reason than it is illustrative of the “all or nothing” thinking on the alien (by conservative Christians) that I have cautioned about (here is part one of ten on that). Naturally, there’s a good deal of black-and-white thinking on the other side as well.
I hope in reading the full essay you can excuse the typical, mind-numbing tropes about the religious right. Want to know what’s scarier than the religious right? The fascist progressive left that is now in power. Want concrete examples? How about 30+ appointed (and so, un-elected) czars, dispensing with the sunset regulations on the Patriot Act, key pieces of bureaucratic control achieved by cleverly circumventing the Legislative Branch, and a full 60% of the American economy now directly under the authority of the Executive Branch (wasn’t it Congress to whom the Constitution gives the power of the purse?). Oh, and then there’s the creation of a financial deficit amount larger than the cumulative deficit of the country’s entire history from George Washington to Ronald Reagan. That’s change we can believe in. And net neutrality and cap-and-tax yet to come! Kiss the first amendment on the Internet (and everything else communicated over the web regardless of point of origin) goodbye if that goes through (try reading the proposals, not listening to the talking heads). Yes, the left is so enlightened and beneficent. Bless their pointed little heads.
For a lesson in intellectual history, you should all read The Road to Serfdom and Liberal Fascism. They describe the American future under the Leftist elites. It is the Left that is most palpably opposed to individual freedom. I’d rather have a genuine Jesus-driven politician than a genuine Mao/Che/Chavez-driven politician any day. Historically speaking (evidence available to anyone with a pulse and who can read), socialist Marxism has caused more human suffering in the history of the world than any other force, hands down.
But read the article to get back on subject.
Is this a joke? The uncritical embrace of demonstrably false partisan exaggerations shows poor judgement and no scholarship.
Remember which administration put forward the Patriot Act, suspended habeas corpus after 9/11, kept detainees for years without trial or independent counsel, tortured prisoners yet rarely filed charges against these alleged evil-doers, brought us into at least one war under false premises, initiated the practice of having a large number of czars, etc. etc. And the liberals are fascists?
And what administration started the long string of cynically justified deficits?
Both parties should be heavily criticised for their practices or nothing will change. When we encourage political point scoring, we teach partisans they needn’t reform their ways, they need only be marginally less evil than the other side.
Shame.
You don’t get it — I’m not picking a party. The enemy is fascism no matter what label it has.
yes, Liberalism has many fascists. Read the book. It is very well researched. The problem is the (deliberate) confusion of terminology.
terry the censor,
With all due respect, it has not been demonstrated that the Patriot Act has ever abused innocent civilians. Secondly, the detainees have always had legal counsel, and it is a matter of debate whether they deserve civilian trials instead of military ones. What is also a matter of debate is the notion that torture has been constantly employed. In the very few determined cases, the perpetrators have been punished.
Your opinion that Bush took us into Iraq under false premises is just that–an opinion. I will agree though that we should not have gone in.
Other Presidents in the past have had czars. It is the present administration’s overuse of them that is in question. As far as deficits, I blame many Presidents for its rise, both on the left and on the right.
I believe that conservatives can have their extremists, but they aren’t the extremists in power right now.
Terry is under-educated on fascism. There were reasons why the Patriot Act came with sunsets — to protect the citizenry from potential abuses. There’s really no reason to remove the sunsets as Obama did unless you don’t give a crap about such concerns. He doesn’t; he’s a statist and a globalist. All of that is evident from his two (!) biographies. He is about the growth of the state and the diminishing of the individual. And he’s not alone – plenty of republicans are statists, too.
It is crazy how this “conversation” about ETI’s gets so polarized. I love the work you did with the series to give Christians a more objective way to see it; let’s hope it takes (and that a similar Voice in the Wilderness on the left will do the same for them so that they can recognize the potential dangers involved).
I’m with you (and Hayek!) on the danger of statism (seeing the government as the hammer… and everything else as a nail) and the slide from this into something much worse.
thanks, father.
Hello, thanks for all the viewers, I will upload many more video lessons in coming days, admin