Join us at our brand new blog - Blue Country Gazette - created for those who think "BLUE." Go to www.bluecountrygazette.blogspot.com

YOUR SOURCE FOR TRUTH

Monday, October 31, 2022

Man who tried to assassinate Nancy Pelosi is racist, transphobic, antisemitic conspiracy theorist

Police and FBI agents in front of the home of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Oct. 28, 2022.

A man broke into the San Francisco home of Nancy Pelosi sometime around 2 AM on Friday morning, with the apparent intent of of assassinating the speaker of the House and second in line to the presidency. 

In this effort, the man assaulted Pelosi’s 82-year-old husband Paul Pelosi with a hammer, causing serious injury. Paul Pelosi has been hospitalized and is reportedly undergoing brain surgery related to the injuries incurred in the attack.

The attacker, 42-year-old David Depape, has now been identified as a racist, transphobic conspiracy theorist who seems to have expressed his belief in all things “Q.” According to CNN, Depape had links on his Facebook page (which has now been taken down) with “multiple videos produced by My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell falsely alleging that the 2020 election was stolen.” 

Depape also used his Facebook account to support former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin, the murderer of George Floyd; to post multiple transphobic images and memes; and to push ideas about the “Great Reset” conspiracy theory in which “elites” were supposedly using COVID-19 in a plot to gain more power.

All the evidence shows that Depape is highly prone to believing in conspiracies. And he found a one-stop shop for all the conspiracies he could handle: the Republican Party and right-wing media. That’s why his page was filled with very familiar lies about the 2020 election, COVID-19 vaccines, and the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

It’s not surprising that some of the things packed into Depape’s online accounts are videos from conspiracy pusher Mike Lindell. Claims about fraud in the 2020 election were reportedly thick on Depape’s Facebook page before it was taken down. So were claims that the Jan. 6 attack was a ‘false flag’ operation. Through many of these conspiracy theories, antisemitism is a running thread. 

But Depape didn’t just have a Facebook page: He also had his own blog. And on that blog he was very open about what he was all about—like every conspiracy theory ever. From alien human hybrids to Atlantis, he was there for every one of them. But mostly he was heavily into the idea that “big brother and the global elite” were censoring right-thinking people and covering up for the “Satanic Hollywood pedophiles.”

He was not just openly antisemitic, he was openly and violently racist against Black people. The N-word is repeatedly and frequently used to attack Black people who, according to Depape, are steeped in “communist ideology.” Just as frequently (and often in the same sentence), Depape flings insults at LGBTQ people, and against trans people in particular.

Running down the page of Depape’s blog is like taking a stroll through the mind of anyone who takes Tucker Carlson’s evening performances seriously. There are claims that Black people get special privileges denied to whites, insults against every letter of the LGBTQ community, claims that both Hollywood and libraries are filled with pedophiles, complaints that men aren’t allowed to criticize women, and an overall theme about how the global elites want everyone indoctrinated into their “satanic pedophile communist cult.”

There’s no doubt that Depape is at the very least highly suggestible, if not outright delusional. He’s also weirdly obsessed with taking kids’ movies and dubbing in beeps, followed up with claims that the movies have been “censored.” 

But Depape’s violent anti-gay, anti-trans, anti-Black, antisemitic tendencies were inflated to extremes precisely because he found Republicans at all levels willing to feed him the conspiracy that he wanted—one that said a white male who hated Blacks, women, immigrants, trans people, and Jews was right, and it was just that “cancel culture” of Hollywood elites keeping him down.

Depape isn’t so much a conspiracy theorist as a conspiracy addict. And the Republican Party is his pusher.



Sunday, October 30, 2022

Biden closes out 2022 midterms with truth: Republicans flat-out promising to trash the place

President Joe Biden is using the closing weeks of the midterm campaign to tell some harsh truths about Republicans: Not only do they not have a plan for the economy, they are also intent on destroying it if they don’t get their way on policy. Their way includes cuts to Social Security and Medicare, Medicaid, and other programs that are keeping people afloat amid high inflation and continued waves of the pandemic.

“Hear this closely: The Republicans have made it clear that if they win control of the Congress, they will shut down the government, refuse to pay our bills, and it’ll be the first time in our history America will default—unless I yield and cut Social Security and Medicare,” Biden said in a Monday speech. “There’s nothing, nothing, that will create more chaos, more inflation, and more damage to the American economy than this.”

He’s definitely not wrong. Wannabe Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy confirmed last week that he is totally on board with the vow from all four of the leading GOP members vying to chair the Budget Committee. Each one of them agreed that they would not agree to raise the debt limit when it comes due in about a year's time if they hold the House majority—not unless Biden capitulates to their demands for all those cuts.

Those plans, by the way, are the most concrete policy proposals the House Republicans have made—that and making the Trump tax cuts for the wealthy permanent. The rest of what they put forward in their Commitment to America was largely platitudes and the usual bombastic rhetoric against Democrats and Biden. Oh, and investigations of political rivals and their families. Always partisan investigations.

Those vague economic plans—cut spending, defund the IRS, repeal corporate tax increases, and keep the tax cuts for the rich—none of that is likely to help the main issue in the economy right now, which is inflation, economists say. Even conservative ones.

“It is unlikely that any of the policies proposed by Republicans would meaningfully reduce inflation in 2023, when rapidly rising prices will still be a major problem for the economy and for consumers,” said Michael R. Strain, an economist at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.

“The amount of cuts you’d have to do to move the needle on inflation are completely off the table,” said Jon Lieber, a former aide to Sen. Mitch McConnell and now with the Eurasia Group, told The New York Times.

“We, the Democrats, are the ones that are fiscally responsible. Let’s get that straight now, okay?” Biden said in that same speech Monday. “We’re investing in all of America, reducing everyday costs while also lowering the deficit at the same time. Republicans are fiscally reckless, pushing tax cuts for the very wealthy that aren’t paid for, and exploiting the deficit that is making inflation worse.”

That and stripping away pretty much all of everybody’s civil rights—all of them.

Republicans have no intention of doing anything about climate change - except to "trash the place."

 

Saturday, October 29, 2022

"We regret to inform you" that Donald Trump is cashing in on white America's death wish


Opinion by Chauncey DeVega

Salon

Oct. 28, 2022

Donald Trump is a white terrorist. This is true in both the literal sense and on a more metaphorical level. As part of Trump's coup plot he incited his followers to attack the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. It's also true that throughout his presidency and beyond, Trump and his agents have used the propaganda tactic known as "stochastic terrorism" — in which a leader encourages violence while maintaining vaguely plausible deniability.

This is part of a larger pattern of behavior. Trump's behavior and rhetoric repeatedly emphasize destruction, violence, conspiracy theories, apocalyptic imagery and threats of other dire outcomes if he and his neofascist movement are not returned to power.

Trump effectively channels the ways that whiteness, which was invented with European colonialism and the transatlantic slave trade, has functioned as a force of terror, violence, intimidation and existential threat against Black and brown people all over the world. One of Trump's favorite tactics is white victimology. His ability to frighten white people about their personal and collective safety — and to present himself as their protector and savior — is one of his greatest powers.

As shown in a recent fundraising email, Donald Trump is using that dark and evil power to great effect. That email begins with the ominous phrase, "We regret to inform you…", which is familiar to too many Americans who have lost family members and other loved ones in service to their country. Those words, however, simply direct users to a site where Trump solicits donations for his fascist campaign — or, just as likely, his PAC and legal defense fund.

That Trump and his acolytes would use such a tactic as part of their fascist grift — when, in reality, Trump despises all the best aspects of America as a nation and society — is vile even by his standards. Let us not forget that this man avoided military service during the Vietnam War by having a doctor lie for him about nonexistent bone spurs. Or that he mocked Sen. John McCain, a genuine war hero and Vietnam POW who refused to abandon his men in the infamous "Hanoi Hilton," as a "loser," saying, "I like people that weren't captured." Credible reporting also suggests that Trump has called U.S. troops killed in combat "losers" and "suckers."

But condemning Trump's behavior is in no way sufficient to defeat him and the neofascist threat he represents. You can't shame those who have no shame. Trump and the current Republican Party have repeatedly shown that they do not care about human decency or virtue; they worship power above everything else, and delight in provoking outrage and disgust among their political opponents (and decent people in general).

Democrats all too eagerly walk into this trap, and then wonder why they are losing the battle to save American democracy. Rick Wilson, the prominent Republican strategist turned "Never Trumper," explained this to me in our recent Salon interview: "We're in a post-shame world, a post-hypocrisy environment. You can't shame Republicans anymore."

The political work of stopping Donald Trump and the Republican fascists requires understanding how and why their appeals to fear, violence and terror are so effective, and then developing the strategy and tactics to counter them.

White Americans who have greater anxieties about death are more likely to support Donald Trump and the MAGA movement. Authoritarians are also more fearful of social change, difference, ambiguity and those outside their "tribe."

What do we know? Social psychologists and other researchers have repeatedly shown that white Americans who have greater anxieties about death are more likely to support Donald Trump and the MAGA movement. Republicans and other "conservatives" are also more likely to exhibit social dominance behavior and to have authoritarian personalities. Such personality types and cognitive orientations translate into a tendency to fixate on negative and frightening images and concepts. Authoritarians and others driven by social dominance behavior are also more fearful of social change, difference, ambiguity and those outside their "tribe," in-group, close family and imagined community.

Social scientists have shown that the white supremacist "great replacement" conspiracy theory is believed by a majority of Republicans and Trumpists. This is rooted in the fiction that white people are in danger of annihilation or imminent destruction by Black and brown people. It has motivated numerous violent crimes, including the massacre by a white supremacist of ten Black people in a Buffalo supermarket last May.

White right-wing evangelicals and Christian nationalists are the most loyal members of the Republican base and Trump's most enthusiastic supporters. Their religious mythology emphasizes "end times" and other eschatological fantasies and magical thinking, focused on visions of widespread destruction, death and calamity. Some believers actually hope to see mass death and suffering as a sign of the coming "Rapture" and their eternal salvation.

Social demographers have repeatedly shown that there is actually more early death, suicide, murder, criminality, poverty, prescription drug abuse and other forms of human misery and suffering — on a per capita basis — in "red state" America than in more cosmopolitan, progressive, affluent and dynamic "blue" cities and regions.

Because so many Trumpists and "conservatives," especially in rural America, are surrounded by suffering, they are hypersensitive to threat and anxiety about their own mortality. Moreover, many people who live in damaged red-state communities incorrectly generalize that the entire country is suffering in the same ways they are. Such fears and anxieties about death and mortality are reinforced and amplified throughout the right-wing echo chamber.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

The resulting impact becomes even more intense because so many Americans are locked in ideological and cultural silos, and rarely communicate or have any meaningful contact with those who possess different values. In a new essay for the Nation, historian Stephen Berry explains how whiteness, violence, rage, and fear came together on Jan. 6, 2021: 

"I didn't know something could be so terrifying and embarrassing at the same time," tweeted the comedian Jess Dweck. The riot may have been a saturnalia of stupid, but we need to take it seriously. There is abroad in the land an entitled minority, marinating in grievance, convinced that something is being stolen from them. What is being "stolen" — an election, a "way of life," a "birthright," a "Lost Cause," Christmas — doesn't matter. Always it is a defensive white male fantasy based on insecurity, helplessness, and rage….

At the base of most contemporary American conspiracy theories is a white male fantasy that indulges the feeling of being aggrieved, abused, dominated, or violated, precisely to justify the legitimacy of the ensuing white male vengeance and demonstration of power and control. Nothing tastes better in the white male mouth than indignation — not a job and not a paycheck. The historian Gordon Fraser calls it the "libidinal pleasures of paranoia" and traces the impulse from the "Illuminati Crisis" in 1798 to Pizzagate in 2016.

White fears of annihilation, destruction and obsolescence, set against an increasingly diverse society, are fueled by how the Republican Party and larger "conservative" movement have, for decades, advocated and enacted policies that have literally caused physical and emotional harm to their own voters. As a practical matter, this perverse incentive structure functions to create more white rage and white despair at "the system," "elites," "big government" and so on, which Republicans weaponize and redirect against Black and brown people and anyone else deemed to be the Other or somehow un-American.

If working-class whites fear annihilation and obsolescence, that's not entirely irrational: For decades, Republicans have advocated and enacted policies that harm their own voters.

This is an old American story, built on divide-and-conquer tactics and the "psychological wages of whiteness." White people with money and power know how easy it is to manipulate poor and working-class white people through appeals to white supremacy, racial resentment, entitlement and fear. In the immortal words of Lyndon Johnson, "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."

In that sense, Trump and the Republican fascists are not doing anything new. Sinclair Lewis famously warned that fascism would come to America wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. That was prophetic; one can't expect Lewis to have predicted the MAGA hats. Instead of running away from Trump and what he represents, tens of millions of white Americans are instead cheering him on as their herald, hero, and savior. Such mass delusions are a defining feature of fascism and other such destructive political ideologies and visions.

America is being consumed by a compulsion towards self-destruction. Time is running out. Will the American people choose life or death? They will soon find out.

"The riot may have been a saturnalia of stupid, but we need to take it seriously." - Historian Stephen Berry

Friday, October 28, 2022

The Problem of War, Part 5


People dug foxholes in their backyards and stocked them with food to survive long enough to answer to an apocalypse that would provide no way to respond.

The Problem of War, Part 5

By George Templeton

Gazette Blog Columnist

Editor's note: This is the last in a 5-part series by Gazette Blog Columnist George Templeton entitled "The Problem of War."

In Part 4, I wrote about Christian theories of war.  They rely on assumptions.  Wars are not just good or bad.  It all depends.

Blaise Pascal invented the theory of probability in the 17th century.  His wager was a cost benefit analysis.  Acting as if God existed outweighed the risk of eternal damnation.   We have a similar situation with respect to nuclear war.  In part 5, I write about this.

Our digital watch cannot display 12:80 am, but old-fashioned watches with hour and minute hands help us understand even though we don’t realize it.  We have a judgment about it, much as we judge war, without even thinking about it.  

We could think about our situation in terms of mathematical expectation.  The value of a risky policy is the linear combination of its probability multiplied by the “value” of what is at stake.

To correctly apply this reasoning, the outcomes have to be mutually exclusive and independent of each other.  What outcomes?  When?  What values?  What probability?  We have to choose between flights of fantasy and pure conjecture.  We have to decide.

End Times

There is a thing called the Doomsday Clock.  If you compress 5 billion years of the earth’s history into a single year, humans would not be on the scene until 30 minutes before New Year’s Eve.  We are now only 100 seconds from Armageddon.  Thermonuclear bombs are much more powerful, effective, and easy to use than conventional weapons.  They don’t require a large army.  They don't require cooperation.  Their rewards are an immediate solution for every diplomatic dilemma.

In the fifties, elementary school children were taught to "duck and cover".  We sat under our desks, away from the windows and the glass that would shatter, slicing us into pieces.  We could hear the distinctive drone of our giant B-36 bombers as they flew overhead.  H-bombs were big in those days.

In the sixties, public service designated locations where people could hide to escape a nuclear blast.  In the eighties, people dug foxholes in their backyards.  They stocked them with food to survive long enough to answer to an apocalypse that would provide no way to respond.  Today, New York public service instructed the city to go inside, stay inside, and stay tuned.

We built most of our nuclear warheads in the eighties.  Will they still work?  We have a responsibility to assure our allies that we can destroy their enemies.   It would be immoral for us to let them down, to not honor the promises we have made.  We spend 15 billion dollars annually to operate our National Ignition Test Facility.  Located in California, it is larger than a sports stadium.  

A nuclear war could starve two-thirds of the world's population to death.  It was an asteroid that killed 76 percent of the life on earth, including the dinosaurs because the sun could not shine through the cloud enveloping the earth.  Ten thermonuclear bombs are enough to destroy the entire world.  Mankind has more than ten thousand.  We love winners.  It is the nation with the most H-bombs.  If you have the most, your neighbor has to meet your amount or better yet exceed it.

But is a winner a better person?  Is he proud?  Is pride the opposite of shame?  Is it the opposite of humility?  Do you enjoy being wrong when it is in your favor?  There are circumstances involved in every moral judgment.

Fear is not a matter of feelings.  We have them because of what could happen.  Truth is not necessary.  Exaggeration makes everyone worry.  It requires a reaction before thinking about the situation and coming to understand it.  When everyone is rattling their sabers, the chance of an accident increases.  Things get out of control easily.

The Solution

Jared Diamond explained it in his 2005 book, Collapse, How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed.  Common problems included the failure to anticipate, a lack of perception, rationalized bad behavior, and disastrous values.  When they are commonplace, understanding becomes no one’s job and everybody else’s job.  We try to escape from a world that has become too difficult, and too complicated.  We join a politics of emotion.

Our penchant for the sensational has fractured our intellect.  Primitive, unthinking, hard-wired emotional contagion chants "USA, USA".  Its intentional patriotism goes no deeper.  Aren’t your emotions more subtle than just “Hooray” or “Boo”?

 This is our emotion, rooted in the world.  It is not just in your mind.  We do not feel responsible when our emotions are only excuses.  It makes it easy to become fanatical and violent, to join that crowd of supposed “like-minded” people.

We have lost our common foundational values.  Diversity and interdependence have not promoted mutual understanding.  In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus speaks about a house built on sand.  The moral of his story is that things lacking a strong or proper basis will be likely to fail or come to an end.

The conscious person tries to understand and evaluate prejudice, war, religion, and politics.  They are more than just our friends.  We can strive for authenticity, to be true to ourselves, our hearts, and our nation.

Since the Civil War, America’s wars have been foreign.  We were lucky.  Since the Vietnam War, there has been no military draft.  When there is no “skin in the game”, war becomes easier to choose.  When there is no war tax, we add its costs to the deficit.  Future generations must pay.  Now we wage a war for truth in an interdependent yet divided and unstable world.  But prosperity depends on stability.

In industry, projects have a business plan, a spending plan, and measurable objectives periodically evaluated by company leaders.  They are not about friendship.  They want results.  Business turns on a dime.  That is competition, capitalism, and Adam Smith's unseen hand.

Statesmen led our country during the placid decade of the fifties.  They would not join the partisan fray.  They knew that “the people” lack the expertise to know how things work.  Their job was to accurately inform the public so it could make the best decision for “all the people”, not just those of any one political party.  They were not overly concerned with job security.  There was always something else to do.  The world needed their expertise.  They knew that the idea was more powerful than the bomb.

Democracy is the form of government most consistent with valuing everyone and celebrating their differences.  When things don’t work out, we get another chance.  We can’t save civilization unless we agree to compromise.  We think that democracy, with its free press and election system, will make it easier.   But now we are coasting on our celebrity. 

Thursday, October 27, 2022

What you eat can make a difference in the fight against climate change

POCANTICO HILLS, UNITED STATES:  Turnips and carrots picked from the greenhouse are displayed 12 May, 2005, at Stone Barns Center for Food and Agriculture on the Rockefeller family estate in Pocantico Hills, NY, about 30 miles (50 km) north of Manhattan. The Center is a non-profit farm, educational center and restaurant that demonstrates and promotes sustainable, community-based food production. Crops and animals raised on the farm are used at the Blue Hill at Stone Barns restaurant on the premises. AFP PHOTO/Stan HONDA  (Photo credit should read STAN HONDA/AFP via Getty Images)
More sustainably grown crops can make a huge difference in how your food choices impact the climate.

A landmark study analyzing land and sea food production worldwide may shed insight into how individual choices in eating can help the climate fight and how policy changes can further that momentum. Researchers at the University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB) and the University of Leeds looked at United Nations data for the year 2017 representing nearly 99% of global food production, noting not just greenhouse gas emissions but how such industries impact ecosystems and how much water use and waste are generated.

What they found included the obvious, like the beef industry’s massive impact on climate change. But researchers also found that pork production poses nearly just as much of a danger to the planet due to pig waste contaminating waterways. In some cases, food production varied in impact based on how industry practices vary by country. 

Though Brazil produces 10% less beef than the U.S., its environmental impact was significantly worse. Both countries are among a handful—including China, Pakistan, and India—accounting for the largest food footprint globally. Those five countries make up half of that footprint alone.

U.S. soybeans were also seen as a more sustainable alternative to soybeans produced in many other countries. Practices that increase yields and limit soy’s impact means the U.S. leads the world in soy production yet with a substantially smaller impact than places like India, which ranks fifth in overall soy production but is two times less efficient. 

Crops in general were a mixed bag depending on how widely they are being grown and how many resources they require. Prior studies found that many beans and cereal crops are incredibly sustainable.

Unfortunately, UCSB and University of Leeds researchers discovered in their analysis that common staples like rice and wheat were found to be just as damaging to the planet as cow’s milk and chicken. Researchers were surprised at the outcome of their study, with UCSB marine ecologist and lead author Ben Halpern admitting his findings made him shift his own diet. “I became a pescatarian years ago because of wanting to reduce the environmental footprint of what I eat,” Halpern said in a press release:

“But then I thought, I’m a scientist, I should really use science to inform my decisions about what I eat. That’s actually why I started this research project. And now that we have the results, I see that from an environmental perspective, chicken is actually better than some seafood. And so I’ve shifted my diet to start including chicken again, while eliminating some high-pressure seafoods like bottom-trawl caught cod and haddock. I am actually eating my words.”

Halpern, who directs UCSB’s National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, may be on to something with his fish consumption, however. According to another recent study, tinned fish may hold the secret to more sustainable eating when it comes to choosing which protein to consume. Researchers found that fish like Japanese anchovy, Atlantic mackerel, and Atlantic herring—sometimes known as sardines—generate minimal greenhouse gas emissions compared with chicken and even albacore tuna.

I know I’ve been eating more mindfully lately and adding more tinned fish to my diet certainly won’t be much of a sacrifice since I love the stuff. Something to consider in the UCSB and University of Leeds study is that researchers didn’t take into account personal gardens or individual hunting activity. Keeping your food more local, either through harvesting it yourself or buying from nearby farmers and meat producers, may hold yet another key to eating more sustainably. Even the U.N. believes that supporting small-scale farmers is a critical step in addressing myriad issues, from food insecurity to providing better opportunities to marginalized communities.

Shifting your own eating habits may feel like a small step in addressing climate change, but Halpern insists even small actions are important. “The individual choice of eight billion people adds up,” Halpern concluded.

U.S. soybeans, chicken and tinned seafood get the nod over beef and pork when it comes to helping the climate fight.

 

The Problem of War, Part 4

 
Ukrainian soldier: "You will not find justice when a much stronger party prevails over a weak one."

The Problem of War, Part 4

By George Templeton

Gazette Blog Columnist

Editor's note: This is the third in a 4-part series by Gazette Blog Columnist George Templeton entitled "The Problem of War."  

In part 3, I wrote about WW 1, the war to end all wars, and opposing viewpoints about the nature of war and its science.  WW 1 was the first truly modern war, with machine guns and aircraft.  There was more to come.  J. Robert Oppenheimer, the father of the atomic bomb, quoted the Bhagavad-Gita after witnessing the first nuclear explosion.  “Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.”  “We may be likened to two scorpions in a bottle, each capable of killing the other, but only at the risk of his own life.”  When we deny the evil within ourselves, we dehumanize ourselves, and we deprive ourselves not only of our own destiny but of any possibility of dealing with the evil of others.

There are many theories of war.  In part 4, I turn to Christian thinking about it.  Christianity provides a kernel for contemplation.  The Rules for war come from Catholic orthodoxy and G. H. C. Macgregor’s 1954 book, The New Testament Basis of Pacifism.  They are about what war should be.  But technology changes quickly.  It introduces new material into the fabric of war.

Incongruent Rules

1) The only just wars are those endorsed by governments that fight for approved political reasons.

We make a sharp distinction between individual moral conduct (thou shalt not) and duty (commanded war).  We want an intermediary between us and God and that is government.  Many people do not have the knowledge to make their own critical decisions.

Can we force justice on others?  You will not find justice when a much stronger party prevails over a weak one.  Total power is not altruistic or wise.  It is fearful.  Justice becomes revenge.  It is often selfish and whimsical.  The truth shields lies.

 Does the individual conscience have to subordinate to the government?  When does it become fascism?  Mussolini said, “Nothing against the State; nothing outside the State; everything for the State”.

Do we have a moral duty to submit to an undesired dictatorship?  What happens when the demands of the state clash with a duty to God?  What if terrible orders clash with your self-concept?  What is the purpose of government?  Does it serve the people or must the people serve it?  The former is democratic.  The latter is autocratic.

Heretical Liberal Christianity believes that people are good.  It believes in self-actualization, that you should be all you can.  The government's role is to give its people equal opportunity, not identity.  Nature believes in competition.

Conservatives say we are fallen in sin and need salvation.  God instituted government to punish evildoers.  He institutionalizes capital punishment.  It comes from His “holy perfect justice”.  But when does justice become revenge?  "Good behavior does not fear its government, only evil does!"  What about Hitler, the Jews, and Auschwitz?

Germany was angry because of its loss in the war to end all wars.  It wanted revenge.  It needed a leader who would confirm the myth of Aryan superiority.  The people did not want to feel guilty or responsible.  They were patriotic and better than those “others”.  Hitler was their hero. Arthur Neville Chamberlain thought that Hitler would go no further than the Rhineland.  The first man to fly across the Atlantic, Charles Lindberg, sided with him. Is Government God’s restraining grace protecting the weak and defenseless?  Autocratic governments can manipulate their people to believe and accept anything.

God speaks for conformity and the sovereignty of religion.  There are more than 100 Christian denominations.  They do not agree and each of them is “right”.  It started with the emperor Constantine and the Roman Catholic Church in the fourth century.  Church and State combined.  Heaven and hell are more important than political policy, so the Church was powerful.

Secular humanism in the West increased over the years because state policy had little religious content.  The State tried to deal in the measurable cognitive domain.   The Church focused on the affective domain of feelings.   It meant that Christians are sometimes subservient to a semi-Christian State.

Many churches mix our flag with guns and the cross.  Nationalism has been an actor in the world's greatest atrocities.  The Christian version wants to teach it in public schools.  But it is not about country or comparative religion.  It comes from white power and prejudice.

Luther taught that the spirit of Christ alone is our being.  Unfortunately, the New Testament and Old Testament differ on war, leaving us with a double standard.  

The Church has lost the moral leadership of the world.   There remains a lot of “goodwill" towards America.  What will it cost us if we abandon our responsibility to the world and our commitment to friendly democratic governments?

2) Religious war is evil!

In the next breath, Christianity appeals to its faithful to “engage more fully in evangelization and not be shy about it.  “In Christ alone, and in his Church will true peace be found.”  Is Christian identity American?  What about the Buddhist, Hindu, and Muslim engineers on my team?

Society runs on belief.  It is much stronger than morality.  Trust implies belief.  No society can function without mutual trust.  Repeated lies tear at the web of truth.  Bigger lies become necessary to support the little ones.  It is one thing to be dishonest to your brother, but worse to be dishonest to yourself. 

3) War is not justifiable when there is little chance of winning.

Did our Congress let us know what success was for the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the Iraq war?  Twenty years later religious violence between the Sunni and Shia in Iraq continues.  The 20-year Afghanistan war left the Islamic Fundamentalist Taliban in charge.

4)  Just war theory requires all-out intense focus to provide an immediate and decisive victory.

Isn’t justice the idea that cruelty is horrific?  Technology wins wars.  It depersonalizes us.  The pilots who dropped more than 2 million tons of bombs on Laos during the Vietnam War could not see the people they were hitting.  We cannot prevent war by building more destructive machines.  We will find the solution in human psychology.

5)  Wars must have clear objectives.

What happens when a war has religious, cultural, and economic dimensions?  How does one measure this?  What is your priority?

We have a “will to live” and a “will to power” which we apply to Christ’s ethics.  Consequently, human collectives are less moral than the people that comprise them.

We are mistaken when we think of countries like people having similar moral claims.  Individuals have value in themselves.  They should be treated as an end in themselves and not as a means to an end.  A morality that is all about producing the right kinds of consequences fails.  The problem is that people discover that they were mistaken about what mattered most to them.

Science does not concern itself with ethics.  Objective management wants concrete results which are measurable at a time and place.  Managers map human emotion and intention into the fabric of their employee measurement.  Intention is a conscious input and emotion is its consequence.  But both things go on simultaneously.  The output feeds back to the input.  Depending on its amplitude and phase, our response can have improved fidelity, instability, or even self-sustaining oscillation with no input.  With simplification, everything in the universe obeys electronic feedback.

Will you measure the Vietnam War by the two million civilians and 1 million Vietnamese soldiers killed?  Sixty thousand Americans died and 150,000 were wounded.  The dominos did not fall.

Rigid dogmatic belief creates an alternative universe with its shared perspectives.  However, truthfulness matters.  We are entitled to our opinion, but not to our own facts, as Senator Patrick Moynihan used to say.

6)  A just war seeks prudent goals.

Conservatism traces its origin back to Edmund Burke.  He was not a fan of abstract principles.  Tradition, historical heritage, and property ownership were more important than philosophy, culture, and values.  He was a “Rino”, Republican in name only.  Rinos are cautious, wanting order, decorum, and slow change. 

7)  A war is comparatively just when the enemy's actions are morally wrong and yours are right.

War should not attack children, schools, hospitals, innocent civilians, and religious minorities.  The charismatic aggressor said, “They made me do it.  It was their fault.  If I can’t have the thing I want, nobody will.”  He persuaded his cult that their failure to support his cruelty was akin to Judas Iscariot’s betrayal of Jesus.  It was better to destroy everything than to be humiliated.  It was morally correct to stop the Holocaust, but it took the firebombing of Dresden to stop Hitler!

8)  Wars are “just” if all other peaceful means have been exhausted.

It is a little bit like writing music.  When do you know you are done?  Music, a peaceful means, not only sets the mood, it defines the situation.  Like the 38th parallel determining the dividing line between North Korea and South Korea, music determines the expectations of a scene in the movies. 

9)  The force must be appropriate and should not lead to greater violence.

We don’t know what will happen once a war has started.  They are easier to initiate than to conclude.  Was the nuclear bombing of Japan in WW II appropriate?  When is nuclear war inappropriate?   How will we end a war?  Does it matter if we think we are winning or losing?

 10)    The doctrine of double effect, both good and bad, allows foreseen but unintended “collateral damage”.

Intent is a hard thing to measure.  It has no explanatory power.  How much intent and whose intent?  What about hatred?

11)  “If he has come to kill you – kill him first!”

It allows you to start a war, but it requires the enemy to intend to kill you.  Was it immoral to kill 26 civilians to stop a shipment of heavy water that Hitler would have used to build an atomic bomb that could kill millions?