The Communist Origin of the Modern Conservative Movement VI

You should address this in the proper thread. But since you've done it here:

Nothing I've said about the genocide of Gazans by nutanyahoo's crew is anti-semitic. In fact, I don't believe I've even mentioned the word "jew" since the genocide began. You just made the mistake of interpreting my condemnation of a guy who believes that the present day Gazans are the incarnation of the evil Amalekites of long, long, long ago as an anti-semitic thing to do. But no. I'm just pointing out the extent of his delusions concerning innocent human beings.

So tell me, how would one condemn the genocide, yet pass your "anti-semitic" test at the same time? By the way, I respect your right to not commit to acknowledging nutanyahoo's war crimes against the Gazans as genocide.

What does many Christians mean to you? Thirty or forty out of 30 million. Many Christians in this context is a meaningless term. It does nothing but muddy the water and protect the guilty. There are a few churches that still preach the gospel and not gospel according to Trump. One is Brian Zahnd of the Word of Life Church in St Joseph Missouri. The republican Party tried to use him, but he got wise. He is the author of several books but when his publisher insisted, he appear on television with Pastor White, he refused, and his publisher dropped him. White is Trump's personal pastor. She preaches prosperity religion in other words the more you have shows, how much God likes.

Zahnd had a mega church with over 8,000 attending services now that is down to a hundred and fifty. Zahnd still refuses to have politics in his church his sermons are bible based and who wants to hear that. He preaches online and has a big following. One woman from Texas pointed out she lived in the Texas County that held the record vote for Trump in the country. She said there was no place for her to go to church in that County. Many Christians?

If you had 30 Christian out of a group of 50. Many Christians might have a meaning but when we are talking about 30 million the term is meaningless. It could be anything between thirty and 3 million. You could use Trump's term and say there might be some good people I assume involved.

I think it involves more than the religious right when every church in County preaches the gospel according to Trump. It is growing like a stage four cancer.

The term many does not have a meaning in this context. It is useless. It tells you nothing and shields the guilty.

Christians have lumped themselves into a group and more than happy to claim the term every time they get the chance and as with every other group it is the leaders who direct the herd. The followers will follow the leaders anywhere they go.

That equates to a majority of Christians, but unless they are acting as a group, does not equat to the Christians.

Why are you pretending to be so easily confused? You attach an appropriate qualifier to what you want to say. Like "90% of churches in ### support %%%%". This is not a difficult concept

Misuse of language solidifies peoples prejudices and favoured narratives, rather than the truth. It is the beginning of, and contributes to wider extremism. Your language use is part of the same problem you complain about.

Your prior pretending to misunderstand the issues with your language us - when it is plain what issue I was talking about, and now pretending to be confused at how to use qualifiers in your own language, is really a reflection of your desire to hold your own all or nothing views, while complaining about others blindness/extremism etc.

As I said, take up your disagreement with the English language. I don't make up the rules on the difference between the words the, and qualifiers like some/many/most etc. Your prevaricating and denials don't change these rules.

Even the pastors speak of an American church surly they could not use that term without specifying which American churches belonged to that group. You would make the English Language useless by nitpicking. If you said many, what would it mean to you. The term might mean 6 to some and 660,000 to someone else it only confuses people and muddies the water. One could say 90%of the churches if someone did a study and provided us with the statistic but there is no such study and no way to use that. If one day if those specific statistics became available to public, one could use them until that day comes it is a Christian problem.

Misuse of language? The term many tells the reader absolutely nothing. Your Christian guilt is showing is showing, you known that witch burnings and tortures, the crusades, the Holocausts. You want to dissociate yourself from all the bad that Christianity has inflected on the world and claim you are associated only with the good. That is the world's oldest game where God is responsible for saving someone from a hurricane but not responsible for the hurricane.

I am in no way confused, the term many would confuse any reader.

We are talking about documented extremism alright, Christian extremism.

Some words have specific meanings and other words don't. You can't convey a message with vague meaningless terms.

If you go back and read this thread you will see that I often used the term Christian right and also the term evangelicals. The evangelical movement has given a bad name to evangelicals all over the world and evangelicals in other countries no longer want to be referred to as evangelicals.

Even in the most depraved human being there is often something good but that is not a saving grace for the individual or the movement.

I don't have a problem with the individuals, it is when the group think kicks in. The people that made up lynch mobs were fine upstanding members of the community, but they would lynch a pregnant woman and cut her fetus out and stomp on it but they would all be in church Sunday morning.

Over here the television preachers are Christian Nationalists who advocate the overthrown of the government and replace with rule by the local church.

America has exported its culture all over the world. One of the primary causes of 9/11 was the Arbabs were trying to stop our culture from replacing theirs.

The Moron church requires all young men to go over to foreign countries as missionaries to convert others.

I assure I am not concerned with the Christians in Africa or the rest of the world. It is the snake you are looking at not the one in the woods that is the problem.

I am not concerned globally just about a theocracy replacing the government.

You have to pick your battles and I am not concerned with the rest of the
world.

Izzy, I spent $,4,500 on hearing aids and my hearing is much better. I stayed in a motel last year that had been sold and they had heavy accents I could not under a word.

I have an extensive library and often discuss the new books online. It helps me get more out of the book.

I don't think I could put a fag paper between you and the religious right.

There is a phrase you can use just there, that is specific to what you want to say (the qualifiers are documented, and extremism). And in this example, you show you know how to use qualifiers.

So your pretense that qualifiers are meaningless is just that - pretense. Qualifiers ensure accuracy, and remove prejudiced conclusions (about the whole). Meanwhile, you continually used the phrase THE Christians, which talks about the group as a whole, and was inaccurate & misleading. Quible all you want...you're only fooling yourself.

You obviously understand the difference between qualifiers (like many, most, 90%, several in Arkansas, etc) of Christians, and the Christians...so at this point in time, I've pretty much lost interest due to your dishonesty.

I'll qualify that so it doesn't come across as an ad hom.

The Religious Right spend all their time dividing people up into sheep and goats, and that's what you, only youmdon't call them that.

I'm sorry about your hearing, and I don't want you to think I'm mocking you for it.

However, I have the strongest feeling that even if you had perfect hearing you wouldn't understand Frankie Boyle because he doesn't have an American accent.

And if they don't have an American accent then what they're saying isn't important because they're not American.

Neither you nor Hightor are particularly concerned about the thoughts, opinions or welfare of non Americans.

Palestinians are the victims of a genocide carried out with American weapons and you're bitching about what's being said in churches.

It's clear what your priorities are.

Why are you so keen to stereotype people? It's like you have to divide people up into sheep and goats, Americans and non-Americans, good people who emote over the same things you do and people you are quick to label as unconcerned about those things – because they haven't joined those particular conversations. It's weird.

You've never met either one of us. Your conjectures simply reflect your animosity. The words we read and write on this site only represent a fraction of anyone's personal characteristics and beliefs. Our assessments of each other are based two-dimensional evidence and lack any real perspective.

Looks like I touched a nerve.

There's a lot of Americans whomdon't have your mindset.

They tend to be of my son's generation, so all is not lost.

I'm sorry as well, I don't mean to go on the offensive, but those are the impressions I get.

I hadn't noticed.


Yeah, I know. There's a political party which represents them. But, as I said, you are in no position to assess more than a fraction of my mindset, or that of anyone else's on this site.


Here's the thing. You jump on Zardoz for not differentiating between nice, turn the other cheek Christians and the right-wing zealots who are also Christians. Yet you use the term "Americans" to refer to a particular segment of the US population that supports the NRA, chants "USA,USA, USA!" at the drop of a hat, and worships an imperial flag. You've done this again and again. And, until you started in on Zardoz, I never minded. I never even thought of complaining about how unfair it was or chastising you for condemning an entire nationality. I know how to interpret that sort of speech and never took offense.

Do you know why? Because I often agree with you. There are a hell of a lot of people in the USA whom I find to anti-intellectual, unbearable, and embarrassing. I know those people, I know I'm not one of them, and I know that you know nothing about me.

Kingsley Amis had some great observations about Americans – can't look up the exact reference now but it had to do with using "American" as a pejorative modifier. Saying "a woman cut me off at a roundabout" becomes more pointed when you say, "this American woman cut me off at a roundabout". Yeah, I get it. But this sort of usage is really common. People do it all the time and no one bats an eye. "Christians" are taking away my rights, "Muslims" destroyed Palmyra, "Britons" voted for Brexit. I just assume people are referring to that kind of Christian, Muslim, Briton, or American.

Were Zardoz composing an editorial for wide distribution I could understand your objection. But he's not. He maintains a thread on this site that reflects the topics which interest him. He has the right to express himself as he wishes. I'd be surprised if more than a handful of people read the thread. I've read his pages for maybe five years. To paraphrase your example, you could fit all twenty print volumes of the Oxford Dictionary, Second Edition between him and the religious right. He's not the enemy. You're barking up the wrong tree.

Thanks for the help. I average between 100-150 readers a day. I suspect I would have more if I did not criticize Christianity so severely. The total hits for this thread is 476,307 but that is over 13 years. I am sort of like the guy in the old joke, A guy walked into a whorehouse, he picks one and they go up to the room. They take off their clothes and she looks at him and says who do you think you are going to please with that? He responds me.

I don't think it is confined to just the religious right. When I was young every church would claim to be the one and only true church and if you did not attend their church you were going to hell. If you went to the next block the story was the same on every block. That has been toned down some now because they finally figured out how ridiculous it made them look. One lie is sure to be followed by more.

The hearing aids do help but they are not perfect, if you send the link again, I will give it a try.

My wife watches a number of foreign films, and I can understand most of the dialogue, but the subtitles help.

I don't think I can save the world and I am not going to try.

I have never been one of those people who walks into a bar an announces that I will whip anybody in this place for a beer.

What is Iseral is wrong and United Kingdom had a hand in establishing Israel after WWII both the United Kingdom and America refused to take the large number of Jewish refugees and used their political power to take the land where others lived. There will never be a solution to Israel problem until there is no Israel and until the Jews are returned to their ancestor's country of origin.

This thread started 13 years ago about the hardcore communists that became republicans but after a while soon it branched into other topics, and I treated like a blog since. I spent most of the time on republican politics which are related to the original topic.

Blood liable is an historical fact and it was used as it is today to generate hate by the Christians of another group. The hear no evil, see no evil defense just won't work.

Let' see how a professional author, the author of "The Kingdom, The Power and the Glory" handles the problem. He refers to them as the American church, not many of the American church but the American church. He makes his living writing. He also refers to evangelicals not many evangelicals just evangelicals.

The government in the United States, has a local government, a state government and a Federal Government. Local governments don't worry about state governments nor do state governments worry about the Federal government. There is a reason that each government focuses on their area. When I worked for the city, I focused on city government. When the local board was destroyed, and city employees forbidden to post on any board I moved on. Local politics would not be of an interest to a national audience.

That's not unique to America.

We have parish councils, town councils, city councils, county councils unitary authorities, devolved assemblies, (Wales) and devolved parliaments, (Scotland and NI) as well as central government in Westminster.

Please don't assume I am as ignorant of American government as you are of governance outside America.

I don't live in an insular country our citizens are engagec with the rest of the world including America.