The rise of menace as a mainstream political tool

[Always in His Presence]

Let me understand:

Congressmen shot at a baseball game.

Federal Courthouses fire bombed and attacked almost nightly for a year.

over two billion dollars in damages from rioting over years of violence

Congress members publicaly calling for open confrontation of their political opponents in public places

members of the presidents staff being verbally assaulted in restaurants

All actions by Democrats repeatedly for four years.

And the article wants people to believe it is a Republican only issue.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Why not say right and left? But the constitutional amendment of the DSA refers to government, not any specific gender of it. It wasn't my idea.

It wasn't your idea -- nevertheless, you embrace it here.

 

[TLK Valentine]

(sigh) The Left, which uses violence without apology and uses it to achieve its aims, both in this country in recent years and historically, always tries to provide a rationale for it that can cover its own tracks. That takes many forms, but claiming that the other side provoked Leftwing violence or that the "real threat" is something the Left just invented. White Nationalism or White Supremacy, for example.

Or calling parents who speak out at school board meetings during the time that is routines set aside for public comment "domestic terrorists." That's one of the latest.

One good way to note the difference and sort out the truth from the propaganda is to watch to see which side ACTUALLY DOES IT. Obviously, largescale rioting, extensive property damage and personal injury by Antifa, BLM, etc. is not equaled by some high school student holding up a sign protesting mandatory vaccinations! Nor is there a parallel to be found on the right to leftist political leaders apologizing for and financing rioters and looters who advance their cause.

Do AntiFa or BLM actually get voted into positions of power by the people who support their thuggery?

 

[TLK Valentine]

He's actually right, but it's not the battle he thinks it is. The real battle is to prevent the church from being overrun with the heresy of placing political power and influence over the gospel.

Looking at US politics, I'd say that battle ended long ago -- the church never stood a chance.

You can be both conservative and denounce the violent and dehumanizing rhetoric sweeping through Republican politics

...expect to be ousted.

- and liberal Christians can do the same when it occurs from Democrats.

...expect to be ignored.

Unfortunately, Christians are choosing to remain silent on that topic even while often repeating the most opposed-to-scripture talking points of their political idols.

Thirty pieces buys a lot of silence these days.

 

[timothyu]

It wasn't your idea -- nevertheless, you embrace it here.

Just pointing out the hypocrisy

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Menace, as a Political Tool, Enters the Republican Mainstream



It paints an ugly picture of our political future...

Thoughts?

As a Purple Political, I'm going to first ask what percentage of the U.S. population identify with this more extreme rightist ideological position?

 

[Albion]

I bet there's folks sitting in church right now who can't wait for the bloodshed to start.

View attachment 308369

If it's the kids in that photo holding a sign, they're most likely sitting in church now because they need help getting to their feet after the service is over. Need the hip replacement and got the rheumatiz, you know. Most are probably no longer among the living.

Using that photo sorta shows how weak this whole attack line really is, doesn't it? I wonder if there's one from World War II that shows somebody professing something mean about "Japs" so we can claim the country is now overrun with such awful bigots...and it's Trump's fault, of course.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Just pointing out the hypocrisy

From whom, exactly?

 

[TLK Valentine]

As a Purple Political, I'm going to first ask what percentage of the U.S. population identify with this more extreme rightist ideological position?

Too many.

 

[timothyu]

From whom, exactly?

From a nation that defends it's constitution but doesn't want to live by it.

 

[WolfGate]

Looking at US politics, I'd say that battle ended long ago -- the church never stood a chance.

In some churches, yes they are down that hell hole entirely. But they are not the whole Church.

...expect to be ousted.

Yes, if the conservatives opposing are in political leadership. Those in the Church only can both be conservative and denounce it without having a worldly political position to lose, which means their voice stays the same regardless of who is in office.

...expect to be ignored.

Perhaps, but that is no impediment to doing what is right. If enough do so, being ignored won't be possible.

Thirty pieces buys a lot of silence these days.

For too many, that is true.

 

[Albion]

Too many.

That's correct. You don't know, so the answer has to be a meaningless "too many."

Well, the answer is, "very very few," and if these few didn't exist, the socialists would invent some.

 

[TLK Valentine]

From a nation that defends it's constitution but doesn't want to live by it.

Doesn't really narrow things down... or explain the rise of mainstream thuggery.

 

[timothyu]

Those in the Church only can both be conservative

Why do we hear so little from Liberal Christians there? Are they politically incorrect? Who politicized Christianity (besides the Church 1700 years ago)? Guess it no longer has any value to God.

 

[timothyu]

or explain the rise of mainstream thuggery.

That is just a result of the selfishness of either side. Too many rights and not enough responsibility.

 

[Parmallia]

Menace, as a Political Tool, Enters the Republican Mainstream



It paints an ugly picture of our political future...

Thoughts?

I think politics becomes sort of "cartoonish" in a sense in this current atmosphere of polarization.

The Right has historically shrouded itself in the robes of the "strong father figure", these days they fiercely defend gun rights which means that in order to make a point every Republican politician has to embrace guns even in wildly inappropriate poses like in their ads. As the party moves more and more to the Right and doubles down on the masculine it becomes more like the "toxic masculinity" we hear about today. The people who vote along those lines will be drawn to it and, themselves, probably let more of their inner "toxic masculinity" come forth.

On the Left folks get more and more swung to the left side, the "mommy state" side, the "woke" side which at its core seems to be to make everyone feel good about themselves no matter what. And in turn the politicians and the voters become a bit more shrill about things they don't like happening in their country.

Ironically just as the nation is deconstructing gender the polity is quickly self-sorting themselves into one of two strict bins: "toxic masculinity" vs "gentle hothouse flower of kindness".

We have become cartoons of fully-functional stable humans.

 

[TLK Valentine]

That's correct. You don't know, so the answer has to be a meaningless "too many."

Well, the answer is, "very very few," and if these few didn't exist, the socialists would invent some.

Well, then tell me -- is "very very few" still too many? Because the opposite would be either "the right amount," or "not enough."

 

[Albion]

I think politics becomes sort of "cartoonish" in a sense in this current atmosphere of polarization.

The Right has historically shrouded itself in the robes of the "strong father figure", these days they fiercely defend gun rights which means that in order to make a point every Republican politician has to embrace guns even in wildly inappropriate poses like in their ads.

It's that darned Constitution thing, don't you know?. But yes, we are aware that there are many on the Left who hate the whole document because its purpose is to restrains the powers of government and protects the human rights of ordinary people.

 

[Parmallia]

(sigh) The Left, which uses violence without apology and uses it to achieve its aims,

I struggle with comments like this. Yes there is a small group of Antifa folks who sometimes resort to violence but no Democrat candidate for office shows up on their ads waving an Antifa flag.

Meanwhile Republican candidates across the board are busy weilding RIFLES AND GUNS in their campaign ads.

Which side is more likely to be "violent"? The ones waving guns around as props for their appeal or the other folks?

One good way to note the difference and sort out the truth from the propaganda is to watch to see which side ACTUALLY DOES IT.

Unfortunately domestic terrorism in the US that results in violences is almost always right wing terrorism.

Obviously, largescale rioting, extensive property damage and personal injury by Antifa, BLM, etc. is not equaled by some high school student holding up a sign protesting mandatory vaccinations!

Does it match a single man in a van loaded with sufficient explosives to take out half a federal building (including a daycare) murdering 168 people in one afternoon?

Nor is there a parallel to be found on the right to leftist political leaders apologizing for and financing rioters and looters who advance their cause.

How about the numerous Republican legislators who have now come to the aid and defense of the Jan 6 rioters intent on killing them?

 

[Parmallia]

It's that darned Constitution thing, don't you know?

What?

. But yes, we are aware that there are many on the Left who hate the whole document because its purpose is to restrains the powers of government and protects the human rights of ordinary people.

It's like you didn't even read what I wrote but decided to hitch your biased diatribe onto it rather than just posting without a quote.

Thanks but please in the future it would be appreciated if your point had SOMETHING to do with the quote you are responding to.