Not too long ago, I read a book entitled Money, Lies and God, about the Christian nationalist movement to destroy democracy. Very well cited, Katherine Stewart names names on the road to destroying what America used to be about: Living with opposition, living and let living.
She started out by naming self-appointed groups bent on straightening out all that sinning going on out there and fencing it all in. The number of them were amazing, so I decided to write them all down. Note that this is not, in all likelihood, an exhaustive list: These are just the ones she found. You may have heard of some of them, but I'm betting far and away not all of them:
Alliance Defending Freedom
Alliance for Responsible Citizenship
American Center for Law and Justice
Bible Literacy Project
Biblical Voter
Bradley Foundation
Child Evangelism Fellowship
Council for National Policy
Concerned Citizens for Education
Conservative Action Project
DonorsTrust
Essentials in Education
Eternal Word Television Network
Exodus Mandate
Extinction Rebellion
Faith Wins
Family Research Council
Family Watch International
Fellowship Foundation
Federalist Society
40 Days for Life
Good News Club
Heritage Action for America
Heritage Foundation
Home School Legal Defense Association
Jewish Coalition for Religious Liberty
Liberty Council
Life Challenge Church
Manhattan Institute
Moms for Liberty
National Christian Foundation
New Apostolic Reformation/Fivefold Ministry Pentacostals
Notre Dame Religious Liberty Clinic
Parents Defending Education
Patriot Mobile Leadership Institute
Political Network for Values
Priests for Life
Protect Our Kids
Public School Exit
QAnon
Rachel's Vineyard
Reawaken America
Reform Prayer Network
Religious Freedom Institute
Salt and Light Council
School Board Leaders
Servant Foundation
Seven Mountains Dominions
The Signatory
State Policy Network
Truth and Liberty Coalition
U.S. Coalition of Apostolic Leaders
Wall Builders
Watchman Decree
Word of Faith Fellowship
World Congress of Families
Ziklag Group
I'm not even sure I got all of those listed in the book, but you can see likenesses within several names; many of them concern themselves with 'godless' public education and striving for a remedy to it. Others are catch-all names for a number of people within a number of groups: the Ziklag Group, for instance, another of an exhaustive supply of Biblical references, is named for "A secretive organization for 'high new-worth families' that vacuums in funding for the [Alliance Defending Freedom, which gains quite a bit of attention from Stewart as a central organizing entity] and its allies."
You've heard of some of these: the Heritage Foundation, the Family Research Council, and most recently, Moms for Liberty and QAnon. The rest seem upon first glance as sliver organizations, but Stewart assures us that their dollar contributions are funneled toward the most beleaguered and best-known groups, which all have focused their attacks on some aspect of liberalism.
Undoubtedly, they are better organized than liberal groups, which tend to stay in silos, says an editor of Inside Philanthropy, a digital media site, and miss the concept of building a broad political movement. "Liberal donors can be a bit technocratic and think you make social change by coming up with solutions that are evidence-based. And that's not really how politics works," he said. "People are less rational than a lot of liberal funders would like to believe."
They still can't believe it. I must admit thinking this way for most of my political life--that victory belongs to those who can sell the most logical approach, and represent people's best interests. But the past three presidential elections, along with the coattails that have accompanied it, have clearly demonstrated otherwise. It is said that people don't vote with their minds, they vote with their guts. I think it could more easily be said that voting with one's guts create the reactionary base from which this chaos can function successfully.
Along with that, there is the implication that Democrats can't appeal to the people whose votes are vital to keeping them in power--so they keep losing the close ones. It seems counterintuitive that Democrats have to find something more emotional to pull in those on the fence, and campaign with harsh, one-way-or-the-highway rhetoric--but they may be in a position where they now have to. The results of ignoring those approaches are above: Religiously-directed campaigning breeds autocracy and authoritarianism, just the feeding ground that Christian nationalism craves.
Do Democrats have to sell religiosity, then? I'm not sure. I don't think they want to. But something decisive with which to strike back at the lies, exaggerations and innuendoes has to be out there. It's clearly missing. Without it, Democrats will fade into the distance, and what used to represent democracy will fade with them. But this murderer's row of nonsense has plenty of momentum now. It makes no sense to say what must take place "or else," because "or else" is here. It is growing out of control or rationality.
And the facts aren't working. There's too much of all the other stuff. It drowns information and logic out. It fills our heads whether we want it to or not. And if a genuine attempt is made to clarify things, others come out and say so, lying through their teeth, sowing confusion and discontent. It encourages us to shut down access to those facts--the worst possible scenario.
Constitutional protection isn't working, either. Ask Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert. There is no protection if corporate powers won't defend what late-night shows are supposed to represent--decent, creative satire. Instead of considering these shows to be examples of decent commentary, corporate executives at ABC and CBS don't want anyone, especially 47, to mess with their playthings. So the show has been taken away from Kimmel. Although he has been allowed to return, it's an abject warning that it may happen again--and not necessarily to only late night shows. Stephen Colbert has also been removed permanently, and although cost issues were listed as the number one reason, his relentless parodies of 47 cannot be discounted.
The First Amendment only matters if you have the resources necessary to take ogres into court--and then, you have to win. 47 understands that if you get into people's money bags, they aren't as high-minded as they thought they were.
Note, also, that education seems to be the leading basis upon attacks on liberals. Reactionaries are trying to depict children as helpless waifs who are victimized by naughtiness. They're getting away with acting on behalf of God in removing sinfulness from curricula. This is nonsense, of course, but the grinding away at the position of the freedom of minds to think as they please has that residual effect.
Does that mean that Christian nationalism is winning? You could say that. You could also say that it's a wall upon which to nail the pelts of those who would dare to challenge the anti-truths that 47 and minions mouth. Either way, it serves a purpose for those with grievances and complaints with newly-found governmental power to interrupt them.
And with the above noted groups supporting these awful actions, they carve out places in the body politic to spread their poppycock, overlapping where they will. I highly doubt that the liberals have this many groups to represent their interests; if so, I'd like to read a book that lists them. If not, they'd better hurry up. They're getting run over with this pretentious bulwark. The meaning of America will disappear.
Be well. Be careful. With some luck, I'll see you down the road.
Mister Mark
No comments:
Post a Comment