- Restored Cricket on Vigilance is not panic: “It’s important to remember that all historical Fascism has been christoFascism. Also important to understand that Fascist organize through a cult of personality. Above all else we must clearly understand that the core beliefs of Fascism are inherently anti-Christian. All Fascist supreme leaders have been anti-Christs who persuade their followers to conflate belief in them with belief in God. As a result, any evil they commit cannot in fact be evil given it furthers the work of God. Dietrich Bonhoeffer presented a clear theory to explain what we see occur in our peers whenever a christoFascist movement arises. Bonhoeffer’s theory of stupidity argues that Fascists and supporters of Fascism are not unreachable due to an intellectual inability to understand the malice and evil they are engaging in or supporting and that they did not become susceptible to Fascism due to any intellectual limitation or impairment. Instead he argued that some of us choose to become stupid. His theory is that we make some decisions that permanently break us from the shared reality of humankind. Once we have done so we are beyond the reach of reason or empathy. Bonhoeffer argued while people can be redeemed from their malice, but not chosen stupidity. “Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease. Against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed — in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical — and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack. For that reason, greater caution is called for than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.” –Dietrich Bonhoeffer, from ‘After Ten Years’ in Letters and Papers from Prison (Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works/English, vol. 8) Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2010 Anyone claiming moral authority, let alone Divine authority, who fails to renounce an anti-Christ and fails to oppose the rise of an anti-Christian movement with the full force of that authority has demonstrated that it is absent. The U.S. and world are suffering as a result of four popular anti-Christs: Donald Trump and his oligarch benefactor Elon Musk, as well as ‘J.D. Vance’ and his benefactor Peter Thiel. Just closing USAID killed (conservatively) 750,000 people including 500,000 children. If the trolley experiment was just those lives versus upsetting MAGA members and at worst potentially endangering some tax advantages, then the choice is clear. The choice in Palestine has been to speak out and act to prevent or mitigate a genocide campaign against 2.5 million civilians (mostly women and children) including ~75,000 Christians at the expense of a relationship with Israel’s government. Insufficient attention and action there cannot be hand waved without stupidity. Greater attention and empathy for the lives of people in Ukraine must outweigh any relationship with the Russian Federation and the possibility of severely limited missionary work. We claim and expect foresight from the Prophet and Apostles of the church. Them demonstrating an inability to confront the facts of shared human reality as we all experience it severely undermines their authority. It is also a self-inflicted injury on their part.” Jan 23, 12:03
- on Vigilance is not panic: “Thanks for this essay. I appreciate your candor and honesty.” Jan 23, 11:47
- on The Church Doesn’t Need Your Panic: A Response to Jonathan Green: “Curtis Pew, I thank you for your response. I agree that government agencies can become bloated, expensive, and unresponsive. However, recognizing those flaws does not mean that a haphazard dismantling of the “administrative state” is the only solution or even a good one. Independent agencies exist to protect essential functions, such as public health, financial regulation, and elections, from short-term political pressure. The are absolutely constitutional as they were created power granted to Congress by Article I of the U.S. Constitution. Yes, there are tensions with the President’s powers enumerated in Article II, but the Founders definitely wanted to avoid the “imperial” presidency that appears to be emerging under the Trump administration. Weakening these Article I agencies risks concentrating power in agencies and parts of government (i.e., the military and ICE) subservient to the President, rather than increasing agencies accountable to Congress. The claim that radical dismantling is inevitable, or that failing to do so will lead to violence, is speculative and as far as I can see historically unsupported. The United States has repeatedly faced periods of institutional strain and responded through reform. Presenting Elon Musk’s mindless slashes as the only real alternative actually harms our constitutional republic instead of strengthening it. Social and political norms have been breached. If you don’t believe me, wait until someone on the opposite end of of the political spectrum is elected. While voter frustration is understandable, blaming the bureaucracy grossly oversimplifies the problem. Gridlock, political polarization, and structural political incentives often prevent change even after elections. I would suggest congressional oversight. Focusing anger on legitimate government institutions can distract from the responsibility of elected members of congress. Also, disagreement with Trump does not reflect a lack of diversity of thought among his critics. Opposition includes conservatives, moderates, liberals, and former Republican officials who differ on policy and politics but share concern for democratic norms and the rule of law. Simply saying that the system is broken does not justify abandoning constitutional guardrails. History suggests lasting reform comes from strengthening democratic accountability, not from accelerating institutional breakdown.” Jan 23, 08:14
- on The Church Doesn’t Need Your Panic: A Response to Jonathan Green: “Like others have said about the OP, I’m so relieved Trump’s policies don’t affect you. As a man, it must be nice to not have to worry about access to fertility treatments, like IVF. I have a chronic medical condition and can’t conceive naturally. My husband and I are trying to start a family here in South Carolina. I’ve been doing IUI treatments without success. We’re considering IVF, but because of Trump’s justices overturning Roe v Wade, a group of Trump-endorsed religious extremists (South Carolina’s representatives), keep trying to introduce fetal personhood laws. These laws give civil rights to a fertilized egg in a petri dish and treat two cells (not even in the womb) as if they were the same as a human being. If this law passes, IVF will likely become impossible. So in short, President Trump could be responsible for me never having children. But I’m so glad his policies don’t affect you.” Jan 23, 07:57
- on The Church Doesn’t Need Your Panic: A Response to Jonathan Green: “Morgan, “You think you know better than prophets?? Why do you keep calling me an authoritarian??” There’s an irony here. Curtis, Being a little government guy myself, I think the American Right should confront the fact that the Constitution created the conditions you’re talking about—turns out most people vote for more goodies most of the time. Your defense of Trump is more like a confession: you’re willing to look past his vacuous morality and Constitutional illiteracy to achieve your goal of dismantling the state. As conservatives we will regret using ends to justify means.” Jan 23, 04:20
- on The Church Doesn’t Need Your Panic: A Response to Jonathan Green: “Piggybacking off RLD’s comment: I teach at a junior college near a major metropolitan area. My students include Mexicans and Latinos generally who have been slandered as rapists and criminals by a man who is himself a confirmed rapist and a convicted felon. All of these students’ families are currently being terrorized by an out-of-control ICE that is verifiably and objectively beating, torturing, and murdering people without regards to their immigration status or criminal record, including legal U.S. citizens and residents, in clear violation of due process. My Bishop is currently covering the rents of multiple Latino members in our ward who have been forced to drastically cut back their hours at work as a direct result of the current administration’s anti-immigration actions. The government very much affects their lives, and it is incredibly selfish, ignorant, irresponsible, and myopic (to use Russel M. Nelson’s word) to talk otherwise. My students also include Haitians who who have received continued death threats after the current VP spread blatant lies about them eating people’s pets, Muslims who have been libeled as terrorists by a man who instigated a terrorist attack on the capitol on 1/6/21, refugees who now live in constant fear of being deported back to the war-torn genocidal countries they only recently escaped even if they keep a clean record, Ukrainians who have seen their relatives in the old country suffer enormously from cuts in military support during the ongoing Russian invasion, veterans whom he has called suckers and losers, sexual assault survivors who point to his election as a leading reason why they don’t bother reporting their rapes to authorities, people of color working multiple jobs to survive who keep being told DEI stands for “Didn’t Earn It” by a failed casino owner who inherited all his wealth from his slumlord father, and low-income students generally who just saw their health insurance premiums skyrocket as a direct result of his policies while he golfs on his private resort each weekend. Again, if this man’s governmental policies don’t affect you personally, great, I’m happy for you, but maybe try and spare a thought for literally everyone who is not you. Similar to the narrator and Anon, I have frankly grown tired of coddling Trump supporters’ feelings. They have been immune to all appeals to compassion, logic, kindness, and basic human decency for over a solid decade now. Whenever they write rebuttals like this, it’s not to try and reach out to their opponents and come to a common understanding, but because they simply don’t want to be called out for causing immense suffering in others. It hurts their feelings. Consider this: If you don’t want to be called out for constantly hurting others, then stop hurting others.” Jan 22, 18:13
- on The Church Doesn’t Need Your Panic: A Response to Jonathan Green: “I can only give a few of my own assumptions and priors. They are not necessarily typical, so to get a good view you should read other sources. To start, I believe in limited, representative government. The whole idea of an “independent agency” seems constitutionally dubious; in practice it seems to mean an unaccountable agency that can do what it wants without many checks or balances or consequences when it goes off the rails. Long before Trump got on that elevator and announced his candidacy, I had decided that the federal government was increasingly bloated, sclerotic, and unresponsive to the real needs of the country. I also got the impression that many voters were getting increasingly frustrated and angry that they kept voting for change, but even when the people they voted for won elections nothing changed. Trump was not my choice for the person to lead the dismantlement of the “administrative state”—I didn’t vote for him in 2016—but that dismantlement needs to happen, well, is going to happen one way or another because it’s reached an unsustainable size, and the longer we put it off the more painful it will be. I do feel sorry for the people who are losing their jobs because of it, but that’s preferable to them losing their heads a few years down the road, which is where I was afraid we were heading. I hope that gives you a little insight. Again, I’m a rather reluctant supporter at best, so if you want to engage more people you should investigate more widely. My impression is that there is much more diversity of thought on the pro-Trump side than on the anti-Trump side. If there is one thing that Trump supporters agree on, though, it’s that the system is broken and needs drastic change.” Jan 22, 15:55
- on The Church Doesn’t Need Your Panic: A Response to Jonathan Green: “A partial response to Morgan Deane: 1) Stop accusing Jonathan of “screaming” and “hysteria.” It was a written post, and he didn’t write in all caps or anything like that. If you accuse him of being hyperbolic, don’t use hyperbole to straw man his arguments. 2) He treated the Nazi parallels as self-evident, and you’re right, using German words doesn’t make his argument stronger. But maybe this does: – The Nazi salutes by close Trump allies at rallies (e.g., Steve Bannon and Elon Musk) – The formation of a national police force (CBP) which ignores local authority and which has made its most aggressive leader into a “commander-at-large” who is exempt from accountability within the regular chain of command and who wears a Nazi-style uniform he designed himself, and which uses phrases affiliated with white supremacy (e.g., “we’ll have our home again”; “One Homeland. One People. One Heritage”; “Which way, American man?”) to recruit unqualified officers and selectively unleash them on cities and states run by the opposition party – The construction of concentration camps designed to be harsh and dangerous and where human rights abuses have been amply documented (e.g., “Alligator Alcatraz”) and barring members of Congress from performing meaningful oversight (previous attempts to visit resulted in threatened prosecution and now ICE arbitrarily insists visits must be scheduled three weeks in advance). Since you dispute the label “concentration camps,” ask yourself which part of the definition doesn’t fit. The definition from Wikipedia: “a prison or other facility used for the internment of political prisoners or politically targeted demographics, such as members of national or ethnic minority groups, on the grounds of national security, or for exploitation or punishment.” From dictionary.com: “a guarded compound for the mass detention without hearings or the imprisonment without trial of civilians, as refugees, members of ethnic minorities, political opponents, etc.” – Coddling and defending openly self-proclaimed neo-Nazis like Nick Fuentes – The fixation on expanding our territory Need I go on? If at some point in the future the administration became openly fascist, they could quite legitimately question whether our shock and outrage is disingenuous, and point out that by January 2026 they had made their intentions so clear and so loudly that no one could plead ignorance. 3) “I used to think that way too, that the Church should take a forceful position on every partisan controversy. That was twenty years ago and frankly, I grew up.” Do you consider the current state of American politics to be nothing more than mere partisan policy controversies? The Church is politically neutral but reserves the right to speak out on matters of morality. Does sending people without trial to a torture prison in El Salvador under the control of a dictator with no hope of due process or release ever not strike you as a moral issue? Does whether we will wage war upon our allies for no reason other than we want ownership over territory which they have already granted us free use of not strike you as a moral issue for a Church with a mandate to “renounce war and proclaim peace”? Does causing thousands of deaths in the developing world simply because we’d rather let the food aid rot in warehouses not strike you as a moral issue? 4) “There’s also an implicit claim throughout that Green knows better than the prophets and apostles. If God had a direct, binding political message about Donald Trump, I assume we would have heard it from them.” Implicit in this statement is that no one can ever question what the Church is doing on any subject. Also implicit is the notion that we can assume God approves of our opinions unless he directly tells us otherwise. And it entirely ignores the fact that the Church is led by humans who seek inspiration but are human nonetheless, with their own differing opinions, and who avoid taking any position until they reach unanimity. This is not an unfaithful take on the subject; it is what they themselves tell us. 5) “I voted for border security, strict immigration enforcement, and a strong foreign policy. Inflation has stabilized, gas prices are reasonable, and I have the sense that someone is finally in charge. That calm is not a luxury based on my race, gender, or class. Unless a person lets it through their own hysteria or misdeeds, the government doesn’t affect much of your life.” Fact check: Inflation has hovered around 3% since June 2023, a year and a half before Trump took office. Yes, Trump is more “in charge” than any one person has ever been in American history, because he has dismantled so many of the guardrails the Founders erected explicitly to prevent one person from having so much power. And how can you really say that your calmness is not a luxury based on your race or class? U.S. citizens have been thrown into immigration detention, held for weeks, and then released with no apology or compensation for the violation of their rights, because they ethnically looked non-white. The U.S. Supreme Court has infamously endorsed ICE and CBP profiling and detaining people in so-called “Kavanaugh stops” based on race. Easy for you to say that you don’t enjoy any privilege based on your race. Have you been a Hispanic person in this country recently? Have you talked with any or asked them how their lives and those of their families have been affected? That’s all the time I have now. You provided plenty more grist that I’ll try to get to later.” Jan 22, 15:17
- on The Church Doesn’t Need Your Panic: A Response to Jonathan Green: “Curtis Pew, So what are the assumptions and priors of Trump supporters?” Jan 22, 14:18
- on The Church Doesn’t Need Your Panic: A Response to Jonathan Green: “Here’s a thought about where you might start if you’re sincere about persuading someone who supports Trump that they shouldn’t. To begin, “reason” is highly dependent on assumptions and priors. Have you taken the time to try to understand the assumptions and priors of Trump supporters? For that matter, have you clearly set out and identified your own? To be honest, I haven’t seen a lot of what I would call reasoning in the arguments here. I would characterize the discussion as mostly assertions that the administration’s actions can only be interpreted through a particular perspective, with the implicit idea that only people who are stupid or evil or both could have a different perspective. That really comes off as arrogant and condescending, which is not very effective for persuasion.” Jan 22, 13:52
