• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

White Christian Nationalism ‘Is a Fundamental Threat to Democracy’

Somerville

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
17,857
Reaction score
8,336
Location
On an island. Not that one!
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
Two of those 'librul' academic types, Samuel L. Perry of the University of Oklahoma and Philip S. Gorski of Yale University, have written a book, The Flag and the Cross, which looks at the growing movement among some white Americans that those "librul Democraps" are allowing illegal immigration simply to replace the 'real' Americans. Examples of the promotion of a fear of replacement by those 'others' may be found in the ranting of Tucker Carlson, Alex Jones, MTG and various evangelical preachers.

White Christian Nationalism ‘Is a Fundamental Threat to Democracy’
In The Flag and the Cross, their new book from Oxford University Press, white Christian nationalists undergo careful scrutiny. Combining research with data analysis, Gorski and Perry argue that white Christian nationalists share a set of common anti-democratic beliefs and principles. “These are beliefs that, we argue, reflect a desire to restore and privilege the myths, values, identity, and authority of a particular ethnocultural tribe,” they write. “These beliefs add up to a political vision that privileges the tribe. And they seek to put other tribes in their proper place.”
[. . .]
Why do you think the term “white Christian nationalism” is so important to use?

Gorski:
I think because it identifies one of the deepest and most powerful currents in American political culture, one that has been invisible to most folks outside of that culture and even, in a way, to a lot of people inside of that culture because it’s the water they swim in and the air they breathe. And of course it’s also important because it is right now evolving into a deeply anti-democratic ideology, one that really is driving some of the most radical fringe groups in the United States today, including many mainstream political candidates in the Republican Party.

Perry: I would say that one element we see, just from an empirical standpoint, is that quantitative indicators of Christian-nationalist ideology seem to operate differently for white Americans than for, say, African Americans. When white Americans take our surveys and answer questions about whether the United States is a Christian nation or we don’t need a separation of church and state or we should advocate Christian values in the government, for them, it is powerfully associated with things like nostalgia and authoritarianism and a certain vision of America’s history as this kind of mythic story: that we have a special relationship with God and that there is this kind of place that we are going — this deep story.

For those who have a subscription, the two professors published an op-ed article in the Washington Post

With the Buffalo massacre, white Christian nationalism strikes again

A toxic ideology is increasingly overlapping with mainstream views

White Christian nationalism can be messy to define, but it’s critical to recognize its three animating impulses: freedom, order and violence — the ideology’s holy trinity. The freedom belongs only to Americans these nationalists see as like them (White men). The order is to be imposed on all those they don’t (everyone else). And righteous violence is to be deployed as necessary to achieve this twisted vision.
[. . .]
The ideology’s adherents are committed to instituting an ethno-culture that represents a shrinking minority — a traditionalist Christian social order in which the freedoms of White Christians are privileged. Theirs is a world where race, religion and national belonging have become virtually inseparable and are not necessarily tied to spirituality. And the spread of this kind of thinking is rapid and startling.

Over the last year or so, White Christian nationalism has become intertwined with the “great replacement” theory, which holds that a corrupt elite made up of Jews and Democrats is carrying out a plot to replace “real” Americans by engineering mass immigration from the Third World.
 
Advocating that public policy should be formed strictly by Christian beliefs is, without doubt, a threat to democracy, which democracy is that of a secular state.
 

White Christian Nationalism ‘Is a Fundamental Threat to Democracy’​


Bullshit.

It's no more of a threat to democracy than left wing nutjobs.

Our form of democracy depends upon the vote and the Constitution. Neither nationalism nor nutjobs are a threat to those.

I wish people would dial back their hyperbole. The useful idiots don't deserve that kind of nonsense.
 

White Christian Nationalism ‘Is a Fundamental Threat to Democracy’​


Bullshit.

It's no more of a threat to democracy than left wing nutjobs.

Our form of democracy depends upon the vote and the Constitution. Neither nationalism nor nutjobs are a threat to those.

I wish people would dial back their hyperbole. The useful idiots don't deserve that kind of nonsense.

Dial back the hyperbole? How about Trump supporters stop with the hyperbole of the Big Lie of election fraud when there wasn't any proof like they claim. Thanks for showing your comments are hypocritical bullshit. You're DISMISSED!
 
Two of those 'librul' academic types, Samuel L. Perry of the University of Oklahoma and Philip S. Gorski of Yale University, have written a book, The Flag and the Cross, which looks at the growing movement among some white Americans that those "librul Democraps" are allowing illegal immigration simply to replace the 'real' Americans. Examples of the promotion of a fear of replacement by those 'others' may be found in the ranting of Tucker Carlson, Alex Jones, MTG and various evangelical preachers.



For those who have a subscription, the two professors published an op-ed article in the Washington Post
think Donald Trump.
 
Two of those 'librul' academic types, Samuel L. Perry of the University of Oklahoma and Philip S. Gorski of Yale University, have written a book, The Flag and the Cross, which looks at the growing movement among some white Americans that those "librul Democraps" are allowing illegal immigration simply to replace the 'real' Americans. Examples of the promotion of a fear of replacement by those 'others' may be found in the ranting of Tucker Carlson, Alex Jones, MTG and various evangelical preachers.



For those who have a subscription, the two professors published an op-ed article in the Washington Post
Is the point of Samuel L. Perry and Philip S. Gorski essentially that the Constitution and its attendant Laws can be ignored if you don't agree with who's suggesting they be enforced?
 
Is the point of Samuel L. Perry and Philip S. Gorski essentially that the Constitution and its attendant Laws can be ignored if you don't agree with who's suggesting they be enforced?

Have you ever heard the term "un-enumerated rights"? With recent Supreme Court decisions and some rather critical ones hanging over the nation, we might be seeing new interpretations of just which "Constitutional rights" Americans are presently entitled to enjoy.

I was looking for a conservative explanation of the term, just to provide the 'right' information for the curious and the google sent me to the following Cato page --


Google gave me a summary of the page

  • DECEMBER 10, 2021 • BLOG

    … which brings us back to the unenumerated rights the Ninth Amendment recognizes. Most conservatives had little trouble with judges securing rights enumerated in the Constitution’s first eight amendments. But when it came to the Ninth Amendment’s unenumerated rights …

    By Roger Pilon

But when I clicked the link, I got the following:

Page Not Found​



404 Error: The page you’re looking for might have moved, a link might be outdated, or there might be an error in the URL if it was typed.​
 

White Christian Nationalism ‘Is a Fundamental Threat to Democracy’​


Bullshit.

It's no more of a threat to democracy than left wing nutjobs.

Our form of democracy depends upon the vote and the Constitution. Neither nationalism nor nutjobs are a threat to those.

I wish people would dial back their hyperbole. The useful idiots don't deserve that kind of nonsense.

Do you really believe what you type or are you just playing with the gullible liberals? Some of those liberals are noting that some famous characters are saying some nasty words that support fear within a certain group of Americans.


Tucker Carlson not only promoted the white nationalist “great replacement” theory, but repeatedly called on his audience to take action

Carlson frequently works to instill fear in his audience by asserting that Democrats will turn to violence or coercion against dissidents, a trope often used by fascists. The idea here seems to be turning his audience into an angry mob, as he repeatedly asserts that viewers may need to take the law into their own hands for their own safety. By consistently repeating this rhetoric, Carlson undoubtedly pushes some viewers to real-world violence.

Carlson has spent the last year embracing and mainstreaming white nationalist talking points, including the “great replacement” theory, while receiving praise from former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke and extremist Infowars host Alex Jones, among other white nationalists.
 
Do you really believe what you type or are you just playing with the gullible liberals? Some of those liberals are noting that some famous characters are saying some nasty words that support fear within a certain group of Americans.
I always mean what I say.
 

White Christian Nationalism ‘Is a Fundamental Threat to Democracy’​


Bullshit.

It's no more of a threat to democracy than left wing nutjobs.

Our form of democracy depends upon the vote and the Constitution. Neither nationalism nor nutjobs are a threat to those.

I wish people would dial back their hyperbole. The useful idiots don't deserve that kind of nonsense.
Patriotism is loyalty to your country. Nationalism is loyalty to your nation, the people in your country. White nationalism and Christian nationalism are loyalty to the white nation and Christian nation. As long as those kinds of nationalists are just a bunch of nutjobs they're no threat but if they become mainstream...
 
Oh, for goodness' sake!

Why would anyone lend credence to two wokesters' hyperbole in the woke Post?

Most thinking African Americans and Asian Americans and Hispanic Americans and Native Americans are consciously or unconsciously grateful to their Caucasian fellow Americans for being so incredibly generous since the 1960s in dismantling de facto and de jure segregation and preparing this country to be run by a majority of African Americans and Hispanic Americans.

Regarding the Replacement Theory, no one knows whether there is any truth to it or not. There may be some people who really and sincerely believe that this nation (and the world) would be a veritable paradise once Caucasian people are no longer in charge of this nation and the world. So what?
 
Oh, for goodness' sake!

Why would anyone lend credence to two wokesters' hyperbole in the woke Post?

Most thinking African Americans and Asian Americans and Hispanic Americans and Native Americans are consciously or unconsciously grateful to their Caucasian fellow Americans for being so incredibly generous since the 1960s in dismantling de facto and de jure segregation and preparing this country to be run by a majority of African Americans and Hispanic Americans.

Regarding the Replacement Theory, no one knows whether there is any truth to it or not. There may be some people who really and sincerely believe that this nation (and the world) would be a veritable paradise once Caucasian people are no longer in charge of this nation and the world. So what?

Why lend credence to two academics work? OH, maybe the words and acts of certain folks in the nation lend credence to the "wokesters' hyperbole"

According to a recently released Yahoo News/YouGov poll, 61% of Donald Trump voters believe that “a group of people in this country are trying to replace native-born Americans with immigrants and people of color who share their political views.”

This survey was conducted from May 19 to 22 and showed that 34% of Americans believe in the Great Replacement. 33% of Americans strongly disagree with the theory and 14% strongly agree with it.
 
This survey was conducted from May 19 to 22 and showed that 34% of Americans believe in the Great Replacement. 33% of Americans strongly disagree with the theory and 14% strongly agree with it.
Let's say the survey is accurate.

So what?

Can't people believe what they want?

Bottom line: It does not matter if one believes in this theory or not. Neither Tucker nor AOC can change the situation either way.

The United States and Europe are a-changing.

Some people are cheering this change and say they cannot wait until the Caucasian population in this nation is reduced to a small percentage by the next century. They expect their great-grandchildren to then be living in a paradise.

I hope that they are right.
 
Advocating that public policy should be formed strictly by Christian beliefs is, without doubt, a threat to democracy, which democracy is that of a secular state.
Magical thinking is a threat. Not some kinda virtue
 
Have you ever heard the term "un-enumerated rights"? With recent Supreme Court decisions and some rather critical ones hanging over the nation, we might be seeing new interpretations of just which "Constitutional rights" Americans are presently entitled to enjoy.

I was looking for a conservative explanation of the term, just to provide the 'right' information for the curious and the google sent me to the following Cato page --


Google gave me a summary of the page



But when I clicked the link, I got the following:
Are you and Samuel L. Perry and Philip S. Gorski suggesting a Supreme Court should somehow find an unenumerated right that cancels an enumerated one?
An unenumerated right would be the result of addition ... not subtraction.

Anyway will you address what I asked? Is the point of Samuel L. Perry and Philip S. Gorski essentially that the Constitution and its attendant Laws can be ignored if you don't agree with who's suggesting they be enforced? Sounds like they judge the worth of a Law by their own opinion of who endorses it.

Regarding your post #8, I like to make a suggestion going forward.
Don't rely on research cobbled together by Media Matters as the foundation to form one of your positions.
 
Are you and Samuel L. Perry and Philip S. Gorski suggesting a Supreme Court should somehow find an unenumerated right that cancels an enumerated one?
An unenumerated right would be the result of addition ... not subtraction.
I agree that unenumerated rights should be seen as additions to American civil rights - rights such as marrying the person you love even if they are of a different race or the same sex
Anyway will you address what I asked? Is the point of Samuel L. Perry and Philip S. Gorski essentially that the Constitution and its attendant Laws can be ignored if you don't agree with who's suggesting they be enforced? Sounds like they judge the worth of a Law by their own opinion of who endorses it.
The professors are not calling for Americans to "ignore the Constitution", instead I believe they are suggesting that the courts acknowledge changes in society that provide more rights to more citizens. I do realise that for some Americans accepting inter-racial marriage or gay marriages is a violation of their beliefs but that does not mean what they hate should be taken away from others.
Regarding your post #8, I like to make a suggestion going forward.
Don't rely on research cobbled together by Media Matters as the foundation to form one of your positions.
Aw, did Media Matters hurt your fee-fees? Yes, they are a Left-biased website but they do provide links to the pages and articles they are discussing - unlike many biased websites on the left and the right.
 
I agree that unenumerated rights should be seen as additions to American civil rights - rights such as marrying the person you love even if they are of a different race or the same sex
Already done
The professors are not calling for Americans to "ignore the Constitution", instead I believe they are suggesting that the courts acknowledge changes in society that provide more rights to more citizens. I do realise that for some Americans accepting inter-racial marriage or gay marriages is a violation of their beliefs but that does not mean what they hate should be taken away from others.
You seem to be singularly focused on marriage for some reason. Are there some currently unexplored marriage partnering combinations you're anxious to discuss?
The professors are suggesting that the value of a position is measured by who endorses it, not its Constitutional merit.
Aw, did Media Matters hurt your fee-fees? Yes, they are a Left-biased website but they do provide links to the pages and articles they are discussing - unlike many biased websites on the left and the right.
Left-based website? heh ... Good one. WAPO is a left-based website. MM is an off-the-deep-left-end based website. Not one that deserves to be used as a primary source.
They provide links to pages and articles on their own website. Like the one you posted did.
 
Why would anyone lend credence to two wokesters' hyperbole in the woke Post?
The lack of self-awareness in this post actually made me laugh out loud this morning. It was a good start to the day.
 
Back
Top Bottom