My Debate with A Christian Warmonger

Recently, one of my family members shared a post I had on my Facebook page called “I’m Not Voting”. You can read it here. A great philosopher of freedom, David Gordon, brings forth just a quick, ethical reason on why he’s not voting in the presidential race in a few days. He hits on some moral issues on why I too, am not voting in this race. Well, this didn’t go over to good with, what I like to call, a Disciple of Democracy. This is the debate that followed between myself and a woman whose name I’ve changed.

DOROTHY: If you don’t vote you have no right to complain.

ME: If you do vote you have no right to complain. The non-voters have used Reason to consciously decide not to choose between puppet A and puppet B which are both evil. If you love liberty, the constitution, the free-market and peace, I don’t know how anyone can endorse any of these two so-called candidates, who represent everything opposite of what our Founding Fathers tried to establish.

DOROTHY: Not to vote is to vote. It’s a vote for the current socialist administration.

ME: I agree with you 100 percent Dorothy, about this horrible administration. But my disdain for Obama doesn’t fuel my enthusiasm for the socialist Romney either (who promises not to cut anything and won’t balance the budget until 2030). Anyway, our government is the most powerful, corrupt, imperial entity on the planet, they’re not going to let “elections” get in the way on their agenda. That’s why our choices are between these two fascist clowns. The only option is to withdrawal our consent to be governed by those who’ve exceeded their constitutional allotted power. Change is not going to happen via the political process; like the American Revolution, it has to come from the hearts and minds of the people.

DOROTHY: Totally disagree with you and think you have your facts wrong on Romney but you won’t change my mind and I won’t change yours. I know I will answer to God for what I did with the freedom He gave me to vote so not to vote is not an option for me.

ME: I don’t mean to go back and forth, but I like these conversations! Do you honestly think Jesus Christ, the Man of Peace, would really want you to vote for someone who utilizes force for desired purposes? Don’t you think a lot of Christians these days have replace their faith in God with that of American democracy? A few months ago, an American Drone strike killed innocent civilians during their wedding. Kids were killed. This happens all the time, but you don’t hear about it. Can we morally justify these murders just because it’s our “side” that has done it? I believe Jesus wants his followers to evade evil, not participate in it. I think the government is beyond repair and it’s up to the people to use the great Christian principles of Peace, Honesty and Love to transform our own little communities.

DOROTHY: God ordained government. And I’m not sure where you get Jesus is the man of peace. That’s no where in scripture. Read Revelation. He’s coming back as a lion to destroy the earth. He is the Son of God and if you read the OT you will see God commanded war of his people. Until Christ returns we all have to do what our consciences tell us to do knowing we will stand before God in the end. I’m not a one issue person. To me the war to be concerned about is the war against unborn innocent babies. The war against our freedom of speech. The war against marriage between a man and a woman. The war against our economy. The war against small businesses and the class warfare being waged. These are the many issues we face as a country and these are the issues God is going to hold us accountable for.

ME: “For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace” (Isaiah 9:6).

DOROTHY: Is Jesus really a man of peace? Wait till he comes back! –he fights the Anti-christ and conquers the whole world. Also, he wasn’t so peaceful when he cleared the Temple that one day. Nevertheless, it is true when he was on the earth that he taught his disciples to ‘turn the cheek’. He never lead an army or even resisted his own arrest–but went willingly to his death.
But he also said in Luke 22:36
“But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag, and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”
Ecclesiastes tells us there is a time for war and a time for peace. You have chosen to be a one issue voter and that is your decision. I think that is extremely short sided but that is why our freedom is so important. We can have different opinions. But that freedom could be taken away because of your short sidedness.

ME: Oh Dorothy, your perverted view of the scripture is why Christianity is in such decline. Your comments are very disturbing, illogical and almost sounds Jihadi like. “Flipping the table over” is not mass murder. It seems like your hatred for anyone who thinks outside of what you’ve been conditioned to think overpowers your ability to decipher between good and evil. Am I really a “one-sided” voter. I have about as many reasons for not voting for the lesser of two evils as you have for voting for it. I think you went off the rails a little bit with these comments and I truly believe these unsound thoughts that you and some people harbor is why America is in such massive decay.

DOROTHY: Wow. Superior you.

ME: Not superior, just awake.

Now, you can see that some of her arguments are very elementary. Unable to have a thought of her own, she’s forced to the regurgitation of talking points from Glenn Beck or Fox News.  You can tell she is set in her ways and no amount of evidence, facts or ideas will ever change her worldview. She has completed her intellectual growth process and will block out all other logical explanations that doesn’t mesh with her set outlook. And she will be smug and self-satisfied with this lack of knowledge for the rest of her life.

One of the most startling things in America today is some of the distorted ideas that are peddled by some Christians. This woman embodies the self-righteous nationalism that fuels the divisiveness in our country. Unable to have peace in her soul, this woman snags a few verses from scripture to substantiate her appetite for bloodshed on anyone who is not like her or thinks like her. She is a hypocrite in the worse way. She claims she cares about “the war on babies” here in this country, but doesn’t have a care in the world for them in another. For some reason I don’t think Jesus views the world with geographical boundaries. But unfortunately, humans do, especially Americans.

Anthony Gregory eloquently points out in a great article that “attempting to reach people on the merits of peace and the perils of war is not always easy, particularly when they hold tightly to what they believe are teachings of their religious faith that validate or even endorse war. With millions of Christian Americans drawing their attitudes toward war from the bloodthirsty lessons of pro-war clergymen, it is not too surprising, but nevertheless disappointing, to see so many replace faith in God with faith in the state, and respect for the teachings of the Prince of Peace with the calls for blood coming from the god of war.”

If Christians are to save the country, they’d be wise to start emulating their Savior instead of acting like the Roman soldiers who crucified him.

For further reading on Christianity and war, I highly recommend a book by Laurence Vance called Christianity and War; And Other Essays against the Warfare State. (Click here for it)

Also, I highly recommend a phenomenal essay about Christianity and war which you can read here.

 

Advertisements

Lincoln, Wilson & FDR: Mythical Presidents and Americans Who Worship Them

The characteristics of a great president are one who abides by the constitution, protects individual freedom, doesn’t overreach their designated powers and honestly represents the people of the country. So my question is: Why are Lincoln, Wilson and FDR always considered by academia, media, historians and most people, the greatest presidents in American history?

All three of these men as president overreached their designated powers, ignored the constitution and failed at peace. These three presidents took on a dictatorial role in governing this country and exploited the will of the people. And coincidentally, all three participated in the biggest wars the modern world has seen. Should these presidents be celebrated and admired for overseeing the most bloodiest and avoidable wars in our countries short history? And then on the other hand, peaceful presidents like Grover Cleveland who vetoed 2/3 of all bills that came to his desk because he actually abided by the constitution, barely make a history book, let alone a face on Mount Rushmore.

Abraham Lincoln, practically worshiped by the both political parties, is arguable America’s first real dictator. As all other civilized countries abolished slavery with peaceful measures, Lincoln plunged America into the deadliest war in its history, killing over 600,000 people. The motive of this war, according to Lincoln didn’t have anything to do with slavery. “My paramount object…”, Lincoln wrote, “is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it.”

By waging war on his own country, “Lincoln did not hesitate to act as a dictator when doing so served his purpose”, according to Robert Higgs in his great book, Against Leviathan. During the war, Lincoln imprisoned political dissidents, skeptical war journalists and anyone who questioned his war effort.  He suspended the writ of habeas corpus, closed down newspapers, monitored telegrams, enacted military conscription etc. Because of Lincoln, individual liberty took a backseat to tyranny for the first time in the United States since its secession from the British Empire.

Was the death and destruction as a result of this war really justified? Or was it waged so Lincoln could “maintain boundaries of an existing federal union, as if those boundaries possessed some sacred status.” Lincoln never respected the states, congress or the constitution; seemingly, he was a manipulative politician who didn’t believe slavery worth fighting for and instead, according to Gore Vidal, had an “overriding vision: to save the Union” and form “it into a modern industrialized, national state so powerfully and tightly coherent that nothing can tear it apart again.”

Again and again we’re taught that Lincoln was an honest and noble man who cured the disease of slavery in America by virtue of his precise actions. But in reality, it’s just part of the gallant narrative to glorify the state and to rationalize the atrocities it has committed on its own people.

In the end, the war resulted with the death of 3 percent of the population (many were civilians), decades of economic stagnation and the massive expansion of the government. And Lincoln, until his dying day, insisted on the deportation of all blacks, because he truly believed they would never fit into society with the white man.

And yet, millions of Americans each year go to DC and stand in awe at the feet of the Lincoln Memorial to idolize the so-called “Great Emancipator.”

Woodrow Wilson, the intellectual academia idol, was responsible for the biggest foreign policy blunder in the past century. According to the historian Jim Powell, Wilson’s intervention in Europe during WWI “ushered in revolution, terror, runaway inflation, dictatorship and mass murder.”

During this senseless war which killed over 9 million people, Wilson used his authoritarian power to imprison people here at home who dissented against America’s intervention, labeling them “treasonous” and “traitors.” As Americans were told the troops are overseas fighting for their freedoms, here at home their freedoms were be squashed in result of the war effort.

War is always the biggest oppression of freedom, but it’s always sold to the people as the direct opposite.

A wave of totalitarian repression swept across the “land of the free” during this horrific time. Wilson’s war was waged, like all American wars, through propaganda and for economic interests. This war resulted in many unnecessary deaths, domestic tyranny and ended with the disastrous Versailles Treaty-which wrongly put the blame for the war on Germany. This inevitably led to WWII.

It should be of no surprise that Woodrow Wilson, a man who lied his nation into war and whose actions ultimately paved the road to another World War, would win the Nobel Peace prize in 1919.

Franklin D. Roosevelt is another president who is utterly praised as one of the greatest. Twelve years into FDR’s Great Depression, WW 2 was blazing in Europe. FDR promised the people that he wanted no part in involving America with another foreign war. Little did the people know that the president was hungry for this war. The polls prior to the attacks on Pearl Harbor showed a whopping 80 percent of the American public opposed to entering another war in Europe. FDR needed more support.

Thanks to America’s Freedom of Information Act and Robert Stinnett’s well-researched book, Day of Deceit, the author came to the unfortunate conclusion that FDR knew well in advance of the imminent attack on Pearl Harbor. The author of this great book show’s how Japanese transmissions were indeed intercepted my the U.S government, which confirms that FDR knew of the attack prior. Evidence also shows that FDR withheld vital information from the Admirals in Pearl Harbor that could have been used to prevent the attacks. Instead of going to the people and pleading his case for American involvement in this war, Stinnett illustrates, instead, that FDR provoked Japan into attacking Pearl Harbor.  The president successfully maneuvered Japan into “firing the first shot”, his thought-out conniving plan all along. After this “surprise attack”, FDR now had overwhelming public support. The backdoor into WWII was now opened.

The truth is, FDR provoked the attack and sacrificed the lives of over 2,000 Navy men to gain support for his war effort. Americans were duped yet again into another war. Some say that FDR lying the US into war is justifiable because Hitler needed to be stopped. This is a credible argument. Hitler was an evil maniac. But so was Stalin, who FDR befriend in alliance with the war effort.

John V. Denson makes a good point in his book, A Century of War, when he writes, “A huge monument has been erected in Washington, D.C., to celebrate the ‘greatness’ of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. On the monument is a quotation from Roosevelt—‘I hate war’—indicating falsely to the public that he was a president who sought peace rather than war.” Instead of this propaganda “perpetrated upon the American people”, Denson recommends that a recording of the Pearl Harbor sailors pleading for life, trapped inside the hull of the half sunken battleship Oklahoma, be played “every hour at the Roosevelt Memorial to remind Americans of the treachery of their commander-in-chief.”

The reason we’ve been hoodwinked into worshiping these three presidents is because they embody the absolute power of the state. We’ve shed the dreams of liberty, peace and prosperity from our Founding Fathers and adopted an imperial outlook for our country. Americans love war or I should say, the idea of war. We have been conditioned to espouse the militarism mindset purveyed to us from all outlets of our society. We’ve grown accustomed to permanent war.

American patriotism is rooted in an orgy of preventable wars, totally oblivious to the ill-conceived origins and of the stifling of freedoms that comes with its aftermath. In America, the adoration for the flag and its patriotic zeal is derived from the misguided sense of the righteousness of its wars. The notion that political leaders might have a devious motive for waging a war never entertains the minds of the country’s “patriots.” The war effort always has blind support. This is how the state so easily bamboozles the masses to conform to its purposes and atrocities.

As time passes, history is written with a favorable tone toward those who led these so-called great wars. Rarely are the intentions of these leaders scrutinized or criticized. But instead, they’re glamorized with a heroic storyline. This is what gives birth to the patriotic myths of a nation. This is what gives birth to the mythical heroism we allot our political leaders.