The Godfathers are scared

 They are scared of the tide of Western liberal memes and above all, scared of one another....

An age old story: Rivalry, tension and distrust between despots: 
(Lukashenko, Prigozhin and Putin) is liable to break out 
into a night of the long knives

I was impressed by the following short article from The Scotsman about Mr. V. Putin, a man who is all but "king" (or "Czar"/"Ceazar") of the Russian federation:

Vladimir Putin's deadly struggle to stay in power shows why democracy is so important – Scotsman comment (msn.com)

The article was a follow up after Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin's abortive armed rebellion in Russia. In fact, the article is so good I'm going to quote it in its entirety (My emphases): 

The means to peacefully transfer power from one person to another is a vital source of national stability

When the Ancient Greeks invented democracy, one of the ways that Cleisthenes, its champion, sold this revolutionary change to the nobility was by pointing out that it would dramatically reduce the consequences of political defeat. Instead of death or exile for backing the wrong tyrant, life would go on much as before after losing a vote.

For all Athenian democracy’s faults, this wisdom is still relevant some 2,500 years later, as can be seen from events in Russia. After 23 years of corrupting the electoral process, abusing his power and murdering his opponents, Vladimir Putin cannot simply step down, as it could quickly result in his assassination or prosecution for war crimes. That means he must become increasingly authoritarian.

There is also no way to challenge or scrutinise his decisions as dissent cannot be tolerated. When Yevgeny Prigozhin, the vicious leader of the Wagner group’s mercenary army, fell out with the Kremlin, he was almost forced into an armed revolt. Following the abrupt end of his mutiny – reportedly after Russian security services threatened the families of Wagner’s leaders – there is widespread speculation that he will find himself the next dissenting figure to be shot dead, poisoned with polonium or mysteriously fall from a high balcony.

Some in Russia and elsewhere praise dictators for bringing stability. However, while three Prime Ministers in two months did make Britain a laughingstock, the ability to remove people from power peacefully is actually one of the most important ways to achieve this.

In 1947, possibly still smarting from his 1945 general election defeat, Winston Churchill told the Commons that “it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time”, but he immediately added: “There is the broad feeling in our country that the people should rule, continuously rule, and that public opinion, expressed by all constitutional means, should shape, guide, and control the actions of ministers who are their servants and not their masters.”

The deadly machinations of Russia’s ruling gangster class are an object lesson in the folly of tyranny.

The tyranny this article speaks of is akin to having Mafia bosses running your country. In fact, it is no surprise that Silvio Berlusconi, a man with links with the Italian Mafia, was one of Putin's friends. In the Book of Samuel Chapter 8 we hear that God was not pleased with Israel's populist demand for a king, and God's warning to Israel sounds very familiar, very relevant and very modern:

10 Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle[c] and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”

....a very familiar story of absolute rulers using the wealth of a country to feather their nests and enhance their power and glory. Despots run states as if the country was their personal property. This was, of course, the form of government in medieval times and its vestige is seen in the UK Monarch's speech to parliament where the King/Queen frequently uses the prefix "My Government". However, the UK monarchy has matured and moved on from those primitive days and now has a very important symbolic & constitutional role of reminding meritorious & over ambitious politicians of not thinking themselves above their station.  It is ironic that today the UK monarchy is a symbolic stand-in for the people whom politicians serve. The monarchy also serves as the focus of the human need to celebrate a personified version of power with the trappings of pomp and ceremony which surround it; the complexities of democratic systems can be too abstract to relate to. 

In medieval times the hereditary system of selecting a monarch, if strictly implemented, would have helped suppress the violent struggles of succession that the above article outlines. That didn't always work, however, but it was probably marginally better than the gangster system in Russia where a thin facade of democratic pretense is a cover for jailing and/or killing the opposition and competitors for the "throne". As the Scotsman article points out violent jostling for power is the name of game as would-be-dictators vie for power. We see the violence that monarchical systems of government promote, particularly at succession, in the OT books of Samuel, Kings and Chronicles. But at least the ancients had the excuse of few precedents of any other form of government from which they could derive templates. In contrast, today we have the well-developed forums of democracy, accountability, systems of voting and law. 

Here's another interesting article, this time from the Daily Express:

If Russia collapses we will all perish' warns Lukashenko after Putin hit by Wagner coup (msn.com)

This article quotes Belarussian dictator Aleksandr Lukashenko as follows: 

He said: "The threat of a new global conflict has never been as close as it is today. They are once again asking to blow up our country, our entire region, to disorient people. To shake up the situation by any means and to impose their own rules under this noise, to establish their own order. which will no longer be our countries or people. "They are asking us to mislead about the real plans and intentions of the collective West. "Unfortunately, our attempts to settle the situation through peaceful negotiations are now called a 'diplomatic imitation'. The price of this 'imitation' is hundreds of thousands of human lives." Lukashenko went on to criticise NATO, saying the world is seeing a "new wave" of expansion of the military alliance close to the Belarusian borders. He added: "Demonstration after demonstration is a demonstration of strength." During the press conference, Lukashenko added: "Our generation is passing its endurance test. We had the mission to preserve the peace won by millions of lives of heroes, our fathers and grandfathers. This means only one thing - we must be stronger than the threat that again hangs a shadow over our land.  "I won't lie, it was painful to watch the events that took place in the south of Russia. Not only me. Many of our citizens took them to heart. Because the fatherland is one."

The piece I've underlined is clearly a reference to the attack on Russia by Hitler. In the above Lukashenko is speaking as if his country is a democracy threatened by a "Nazi" West, when in fact he himself is a tyrannical dictator. This brazen distortion of the facts is remarkable; does he really believe his own lying spin? When he says "If Russia collapses, we will all perish" what he really means is that a collapse would usher in either anarchy as gangsters compete for power or it would be the end of his ilk and the whole gangster system of rule. "The fatherland is one"? That should read "The Godfatherland is one". The threat isn't to his country and its people but to the ruling criminal class in the face of the creeping cultural memes of Western democracy. The Mafia Godfathers have everything to lose in the face of the struggle for open, accountable and democratic societies. Let's be wary, therefore, and not underestimate how many people these cornered criminals are prepared to kill in order to maintain their power and status. 

And let's not be complacent in the West. American democracy & constitution seemed to be working OK until Donald Trump appeared on scene, when accusations of electoral corruption and news of lawsuits started to saturate the air-waves. Trump's man Micheal Flynn suggested using the army to enforce Trump's rule and I heard one of Trump's followers saying they wanted Trump to set up a dynasty. And then there was that "Golden Trump" statue, the QAnon followers of Trump like Margorie Taylor-Greene who is a Putin sympathizer and the support of popular evangelical religionists..... these people are being duped into acting as kingmakers.

Trump: The cuckoo in the evangelical nest

Relevant Link

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66388422

Quote from the BBC article:

"I was going to get a mortgage this year and buy a flat for our family," Peter tells the BBC. "My wife and I were discussing plans for the future. Now everything is on hold.

"From next January I can be called up to serve and sent to Ukraine. I don't want to join the army, I don't want to take part in this war and die for someone else's goals."

MY COMMENT: The aggressors who are attacking the Russian people are not outside forces, but the Godfathers who despotically rule Russia and treat it as a means  of achieving their personal ambitions of conquest, glory and wealth. (Trump is trying to do the same in America). In the days of aristocratic rule it was axiomatic that one serves the purposes and desires of one's liege lord; in effect one was one's Lord's property. I'm tempted to say that Putin is a throw back, but I don't think the "aristocratic" system of rule ever went away completely, except perhaps in name and today's despotic rulers try to gloss their governance with democratic speak. 

More Notes on Conspiracy Theorism

                                   

  Conspiracy theorism comes in degrees.  (Zoom in to read)

I was recently in an email discussion about African culture with a friend who lives in Africa. The rural African mind sees a very different world of causation to our own, and yet in the final analysis it isn't so very different to the Western mind. See below for an edited extract of my correspondence with my friend

***

And now, a comment on the attraction of conspiracy theorism, an epistemic method used by the politically far-right, far-left, Christian fundamentalists, numerous websites and, may I add, many rural Africans.

As gregarious animals humans have to deal with that most complex of all created objects i.e. other humans. In having to cope with social relations we are constantly called to attempt to read between the lines of human behaviour in order to understand one another. But in contexts where suspicions about sinful motives are rife the mind can get up to all sorts of tricks as it tries to read into the minds of others through a fog of distrust. So, this very sophisticated ability which attempts to decode human behaviour comes with an overhead of side effects, especially when human interests conflict. Viz: it all too easily interpolates imaginary scenarios and is sometimes apt to too readily commit to those imagined scenarios.

***

Stage 1 conspiracy theorism starts with a toxic mix of emotions. emotions which may include fear, distrust, paranoia, confusion, anger, frustration and envy. This mix is fertile ground for stage 2 where there is a desire to justify & explain these emotions rather than accept their causes as due to inexplicably random circumstances. Stage 3 occurs when the fecund human imagination attempts to join the dots of observation with background stories which rationalise, simplify, dignify and make sense of one’s otherwise perplexing experiences; this involves creating a cast of nefarious hidden actors who are thought to be the cause of one’s problems and who then become the focus of one’s blame and anger. Personalising the struggle in this way somehow makes it easier to cope with.  For Africans the dots are joined with witches and spirits. In mid-17^th century England the witch finder general (Matthew Hopkins) blamed crabby women. For American Trumpite “QAnon” Christians it’s those evil “woke” conspiracists who may even be accused of being involved in Satanism. And it’s really gone over the top with the Christian flat earthists (and young earthists) who see the whole secular educational system being involved in a lying conspiracy to defraud us of our central place in God’s creation.

***

The actual causes behind the frustrations & aggravations in the little picture of our lives can be breathtakingly banal, commonplace, random and not down to the direct planned action of nefarious antagonists, whether they be spirits, demons, Satan, or human conspirators. We may like to think of ourselves as heroic figures fighting against those who have got it in for us, but the truth may be far more mundane & vapid. But to see the real struggle we have to step back from our everyday commonplace frustrations and look at the big picture. It is only when we step back and look at the big picture can we see the real causes: Seldom are our problems a result of a direct Satanic attack or an outcome of carefully planned human conspiracies to thwart us. Yes, many of our problems ultimately do trace back to human Sin, human epistemic failings and Satanic evil, but I see the main problem being the impersonal backwash of chaos which bad actors (human & Satanic) leave behind. That is, most of our problems are due to the indirect action of bad actors and the tsunami of chaos that their behaviour triggers.  The ultimate struggle is against the chaos beast: Kaoskampf!

Norwich Churches and Belief Communities: Themed Bible Study: Chaoskampf. (norwichcentralbaptistchurch.blogspot.com)

Quantum Non-Linearity: The Compulsion of Conspiracy Theorism (quantumnonlinearity.blogspot.com)

Carlson: Caught Lying for Trump

Tucker Carlson & Fox News appear to be a trusted source at 

right-wing fundamentalist ministry "Answers in Genesis"

(click to enlarge)

Tucker Carlson, a Fox News liar who has promoted numerous conspiracy theories, particularly about election fraud, has left Fox News.....seemingly because those lies about election rigging have come home to roast roost at Fox News and Fox News needs a scapegoat, not that this scapegoat is innocent: Carlson was undoubtedly the vilest kind of conspiracy liar; in fact given his prominence and influence I would rate him second only to Alex Jones. 

As Carlson was so linked to Donald Trump, maybe his demise will help hold back Trump's bid for the presidency and what looks like the ulterior aim to turn the US into a right-wing dominionist dictatorship. Hopefully it will also hold back the career of authoritarian Qanon conspiracy crackpot and Putin supporter Marjorie Taylor Greene

NOTES: links to far-right  stories

1)  Here's a BBC link

Tucker Carlson leaves Fox News - BBC News

2) An FB friend of mine was criticizing the alt-right on his FB page. I agreed and added this comment:

A pretty standard & historically well tested strategy by the alt-right: Tap into fears, insecurity, bitterness, a sense of injustice, anger and the like, and then create an ogre by demonizing a group of people to pin the blame on. We've seen it so many times before!

 That is true of compromised popularist fundamentalists, Fox News and also the far-left

3)  Here's a Guardian Link:

Trump and Tucker Carlson were codependent. Their venn diagram was one angry white circle (msn.com)

4) A link on Taylor-Greene:

Will Marjorie Taylor Greene be the next Vice President of America? (msn.com)

5) Trump: If he thinks he can grab power without having to engage in a debate and give public account of himself then he will: He's conceited enough to think everyone wants him to be president and those who don't are engaged in an act of betrayal. This is the mind of a wannabe dictator who hates public accountability. 

Trump revives threat of skipping GOP presidential debates (msn.com)

6) Further evidence suggesting Trump is a dictator in waiting:

Donald Trump refuses to say if he wants Ukraine to win war against Russia (msn.com)

7) Trump to end Ukraine support?

How Trump presidency could change Ukraine war - BBC News

8) Trump vs DeSantis: Rightist vs Rightist. 

Donald Trump says ‘disloyal’ Ron DeSantis needs ‘personality transplant’ in rant ahead of campaign launch (msn.com)

9) Boebert vs Greene: Another Rightist vs Rightist squable:

Voices: The unsavory truth behind the Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert drama (msn.com)

Ham fisted "logic"

No cat has eight tails:  A cat has one tail more than no cat:

 Therefore, a cat has nine tails.

In a blog post titled Is It Even Possible for God to Use Evolution? dated 14^th April, fundamentalist theme park manager, Ken Ham states the (false) general theological premise that guides much of his young earthist thinking:

KEN: Is it even possible for God to use evolution to create? Think about it for a moment—could God use millions of years as part of his creation of life? “Of course he can. He’s God—he can do whatever he wants!” is the response I’ve received from many Christians and Christian leaders who believe God did use evolution and millions of years. But the answer to that question is actually no—he couldn’t have!

You see, God didn’t create the world the way we see it today. After he finished creating, he declared everything “very good” (Genesis 1:31). [With Evolution] One would then have to accept that God is calling death, diseases like cancer, and violence “very good.” That is an attack on the character of God.

 MY COMMENT: According to Cambridge biologist and evangelical Christian Denis Alexander the Biblical sense of “Very good” is not "perfection" but “Fit for purpose". Even in our own language something can be “very good” but far from perfect. We can talk of human beings as "very good" but they are all tainted by Sin, the progressive moral disease spelt with an "I" in the middle. Also, that humanity was commanded to subdue the Earth (Gen 1:28) is evidence that it was no finished work of perfection. The story of the serpent also tells us that even before the The Fall humans were not in a perfect world, for at least one created being ( Colossians 1:16) had already fallen. But the strongest evidence for an imperfect creation is found in the very fact that two of its main created protagonists, Satan and Mankind, had the potentiality to fall to temptation; unlike Jesus whose moral perfection meant that he did not fall when tempted.  A propensity to fall will, presumably, not be the case in the metamorphosed creation mentioned in the New Testament. 

KEN: So, could God use evolution and millions of years to create? No! Since it’s impossible for God to deny himself and go against his character, it’s impossible for God to use a bloody, death-stained process like evolution to create life.

God could not use (or could not have used) evolution and millions of years for this same basic reason. It would be impossible for him to do so because it would go against his character.

MY COMMENT: Even if for the sake of argument one accepts Ken’s 6000 year time scale his reasoning still collapses. Unless we are deists, we believe that God's work didn’t stop at the end of the creation days: Novel and original reified history is constantly emerging everywhere and everywhen from the platonic world of possibility: Death, disease, violence and evil are being reified hour by hour into the secular realm. Since God is unconditional sovereign, this can only be the case if God’s Permissive Will allows it. Two very significant reifications were the fall of Satan and humanity. Like many other evils these "free choice" events weren't blocked from reification, but for inscrutable divine purposes they secured God's permission to enter the created world.  They are evidence that Satan and humanity were subject to vanity from the start: God, of course, being omniscient, knew the potential consequences of this vanity, but nevertheless suffered to bring forth this story of imperfection from the platonic realm into the reified created realm. 

But according to Ken's "logic" it is impossible for God to reify this ongoing catalogue of evil because his nature denies that he can make use of such. But, apparently, He is making use of it (Romans 8:28ff).  We are of course wading into deep water here: This is the famous and perplexing question of suffering and evil, a problem which has consumed the thought and ink of many a theologian and philosopher: Viz: How can a just, loving and omnipotent God allow suffering and evil in his world and moreover sustain its existence on a day-by-day basis? What use can he make of the bad choices of humans and Satan? Why doesn't He block these choices? Why also, is the natural world permitted to be a source of suffering? I'm certainly not going to address these perennial questions here: I just want to point out that Ken's argument touches on deep mysteries few of us understand. The suffering and death entailed by evolution is not a sufficient theological reason (as opposed to any scientific reasons that may be tendered) to rule it out. It appears that Ken hasn't twigged that his problem with evolution is just another manifestation of the age-old problem of suffering and evil. He's carelessly floated an argument without seeing its implications: If we follow through with Ken's logic then we would conclude that our flawed world should never have been reified at all. 

But in the face of suffering the Bible does gives us hope: As Romans 8:18-22 says:

I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to vanity, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time.

Our world with all its pains and its flawed protagonists, evolution or no evolution, is the world that God has brought out of the platonic realm by his permissive will, but the above verses tell us there is a happy ending. However, according to Ken’s simplistic logic our world of suffering should not exist because it would contradict God's nature. Go and read C. S. Lewis' The Problem of Pain, Ken!

KEN:  Indeed, as I’ve said before, Christians who believe in evolution and millions of years are condoning a process that is a direct attack on God’s character.

MY COMMENT: That's right Ken now use your toy-town logic to slander Christain evolutionists and thrust into their mouths a confession of blaspheming God's character! You would have done The Inquisition proud!

KEN:  A Salvation Issue? Let me pause to state something very clearly: I am not saying people who believe in evolution and millions of years can’t be Christians. Salvation is not conditioned upon what one believes about the age of the earth or evolutionary processes but is conditioned upon faith in Christ. I have never said the age of the earth and what you believe about creation are salvation issues. However, evolution and millions of years are issues that undermine biblical authority and attack the character of God. And I consider those very serious issues indeed! Also, such compromise has greatly weakened much of the church, causing many to doubt God’s Word, and many end up rejecting the Bible as God’s Word.

MY COMMENT: I once asked a Jehovah's Witness whether joining one of the Watchtower's Kingdom Halls was a necessary condition for the JW's concept of salvation: He said "No" and that God may well have servants beyond the walls of the Kingdom Halls. But I knew and he knew that certainly would not include someone like myself who claimed Christ's Saving work but rejected the Watchtower doctrines. His admission that there may be saved individuals outside of the organization was window dressing helping to make his religion look a little less like a cult. We see something similar in the quote above:  At first sight it makes AiG look less cultish than it actually is and acts as soft soap. In practice Ken in no-way respects the faith of those Christians who disagree with him: Just look at the accusations he flings out at old earth Christians (See here and here): Ken tells such Christians that they are attacking Christ and the Gospel. Accusations of being at odds with the divine don't come much stronger. Clearly the above quote is lip service which helps deflect accusations of cultishness. 

Ken's right-wing extremism invites an extreme counter-response: Viz: His cartoonish organization, AiG, has weakened the church and caused many to stumble and reject Christianity. For you can be sure that if I find Ken's views destructive of the Gospel many others of a more secular frame of mind certainly do! Ken should repent of his Trump voting, his implicit QAnon support and his cultish attitudes. 

Trumptruth News: The Political Pied Piper of far-right Christianity

The cuckoo in the nest

I've included this post under my "Trumptruth" heading because it exemplifies just how different is the world as perceived by myself compared to that of right-wing Christians, many of whom follow political Pied Piper Donald Trump,  

Probable Trump voter, implicit QAnon supporter and theme park manager Ken Ham is my favorite bellwether of fundamentalist far-right thought. So, when I saw that Ken had written a blog post titled "Nothing New" (Dated 11th April) even before I had read it I guessed it would be about his shibboleth of societal decay: Viz Sexuality and gender, and needless to say it was. Right wing Christianity is filled with fears about where "Woke culture " and "Critical theory" are taking us on the subject of sexuality and gender, fears that appear to crowd out what to me are far more important concerns. Far-right Christian fundamentalists perceive a very different world to myself and the following issues, which are matters of serious concern in my opinion, do not register with a very loud blip on their radar: 

1. Putin's dictatorship and his "Christian holy war".

2. Right wing Christians like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Steve Bannon who support Putin and/or the QAnon conspiracy and look as though they just might get into a Trump government. 

3. Recently the US has been called a backsliding democracy. Support for this idea is seen in that the far right are unwilling to consent to a bipartisan system where opposing political groups may have sharp disagreements but nevertheless accept that both are subject to the same democratic constitution. Instead, the far right see it as their duty to demonize and eliminate the opposition who they incorrectly refer to as the "radical left".  (Big tech "radical left"? Really?). The trouble is that once this trend has been initiated (by Donald Trump, in this case) it is self-reenforcing as the opposite wing responds in kind. 

4. The rise of the would-be dictator Donald Trump who is the Pied Piper of  American evangelicalism

5. The link between the rise of Marxism (which, in spite of its pretensions, also leads to dictatorships) and plutocratic versions of capitalism which encourage a Marxist world view by way of counter-reaction. 

6. A "libertarian" live and let live attitude toward changing environmental goal posts.

***

The Bible warns us against the politics of Kings (= dictators) in the book of Samuel (See 1 Samuel 8:10-22). 

Political and Religious Bullying

Picture from :An Epidemic of political intimidation: Why America suffers from a cult of bullies who refuse to negotiate | Milwaukee Independent

I was fascinated to read a post by fundamentalists theme park manager, Ken Ham, entitled "When it comes to Genesis can we be dogmatic?" and dated 3rd March. This is what Ken is advising us in this post:

Recently on my social media posts, some people have dogmatically expressed that I shouldn’t be so dogmatic about the stand we take on Genesis. They dogmatically claim that I should allow for the views of others who very dogmatically disagree with me. In other words—they want me to hold to their dogmatic position of allowing other views, and therefore I should not hold dogmatically to my view (based on the Bible) that disagrees with them.

Those who make these kinds of comments on my social media feed seem unable to understand that whatever position you hold, you dogmatically hold to that position. To say you allow other views is a dogmatic position that, in essence, claims that someone like me can’t say I have the correct view as that means the other views are wrong.

Actually, dogmatism isn't the problem. There's nothing wrong with being dogmatic about something one believes in: Ken really believes that the huge cosmos is a cosy 6000 years old and therefore one expects him to be dogmatic, especially as he has such large material stakes in this literalist interpretation. But more about the real problem later.

Above Ken is using the self-referencing gambit here and in his usual ham-fisted way has muffed it again. Someone accuses Ken of X and he responds by suggesting that in the very act of accusing him of X the accusers stand guilty of the same flaw.  But in this case it doesn't work: Ken's accusers may well be justifiably dogmatic in accusing Ken of being dogmatic about something one can't actually be dogmatic about. After all, there were no eyewitness to the act of Creation mythologised in the Genesis 1 account (Unless we have a very anthropomorphized picture of a God with eyes!). Many Christians believe that interpreting the Genesis-Day as literally 864,000 seconds long is not justified by the Genesis 1 text which talks of events beyond human witness and quite possibly beyond human understanding. In fact, the vociferous dogmatism of a theme park manager with a career at the head of a multi-million-dollar business-empire whose products rest on the assertion that the Genesis 1 days are 864,000 second long lends little credibility to his emphatic literalist view. Self-praise is no recommendation. 

Ken is wrong to say that whatever position you hold, you dogmatically hold to that position. That doesn't take into account that dogmatism comes in shades of grey: There's "dogmatic", there's "very dogmatic", there's "not very dogmatic" and no doubt all the states in-between. Some beliefs we hold are less dogmatically held than others: For example, I'm pretty dogmatic about the reality of my conscious thought life (See footnote *). In contrast I'm a lot less dogmatic about a very important aspect of my life; namely my Christain faith: Well, some spiritual ultras will probably think  that's evidence of a deep spiritual flaw: That may well be, but it helps to be reminded that in reply to Jesus question "Are you also wishing to go away?" (John 6:67) Peter responded with the minimalist "To whom shall we go? " and then more positively "You have the words of everlasting life" (John 6:68). My reliance is not on my own faith, but the thought God the Father is holding onto me much better than I'm holding on to Him (John 6:44, Romans 8:15). Yes, Truth itself comes in binary on or off states but belief, faith and one's approximations to truth do not. One's dogmatism level varies, so Ken can't assume that people who politely criticize him as "too dogmatic" (whatever that actually means) have the same bigoted attitudes toward the subject in question as he has. 

In the simplified world of Ken Ham, the world is cast into a mold of contrasting states of extreme belief or extreme disbelief; a world of fundamentalist tribal loyalties vs potentially demonic affiliation, a world of sheep vs. wolves, a world where one is a sold-out cheer leader for Ken & company or a hardened, perhaps evil, nay-sayer. Ken thinks everyone in the world must be like him: bigoted and prejudiced in their expression of belief. This is a very similar to the perspective painted by American evangelicalism's Political Pied Piper Donald Trump, (and a man who Ken very likely voted for), a man whose ego naturally polarizes the world into those for him and those against him. Let's also recall here Ken's implicit support for the QAnon mythology surrounding Trump.  The irony is that in believing this polarized picture of the world Ken and Trump have guaranteed it.

We find out just how Ken's "dogmatism" manifests itself when he condemns those Christians who don't believe his young earthist message. He might try to soft-focus his cultish-attitudes by claiming that young earthism doesn't disqualify one's faith but in practice this claim is not true and Ken all but "excommunicates" from the faith those who don't hold his views. See here for more on how Ken treats those he thinks of as antagonists. Ken, of course, has a perfect right to believe his young earthism, even believe it dogmatically; I wish to God it was mere dogmatism.  But to call Ken "dogmatic" is actually to give the word "dogmatic" a bad name: In fact, I'm not sure that Ken's accusers were actually talking about beliefs that Ken has a perfect right to be dogmatic about....For far worse than mere dogmatism, Ken treads the very borders of a cult version of Christianity, a version where any challenge to the party line brings down the most extreme accusations of sins and threats of divine wrath. This intimidatory language is the stuff that the spiritual abuse found in the cults is made of: It is the latter, I suspect, which Ken mistakes for mere "dogmatism"!. Ken also mistakes tolerance with relativism. Viz:

To say you allow other views is a dogmatic position that, in essence, claims that someone like me can’t say I have the correct view as that means the other views are wrong.

No, Ken! To allow other views on Genesis, even if dogmatically expressed, even though one believes them to be wrong, doesn't mean one subscribes to a form of relativism: Rather it's about having respect for the conscience of those with differing opinions on the content of Genesis and not attempting to intimidate them with slanderous spiritual accusations. Cult leaders and cult followers just cannot believe that those who disagree with them do so for anything other than malign hidden reasons and underneath it have guilty consciences. They therefore have no compunction about slandering the motives antagonists. But if Ken persists in being a nasty spiritual bully...well, two can play at that game; so let me say this: Ken has wrongly mistaken his nasty bigoted mindset for mere "dogmatism". 

Highly sectarian religionists have a tendency to think that other far less sectarian Christians think just like themselves and are really just another cult albeit cults in the bondage of severe error. One sectarian I had contact with confidently told me this.....

The bottom line is: Anglicans, Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals and Presbyterians are ALL sects of Christianity; they might profess to be one, to love one another and be part of the Body of Christ; but secretly and behind closed doors: A. They don’t like each other and condemn one another. B. They all have their own slant and interpretation of scripture, for which their individual denomination is based...and C. They refuse to have deep, meaningful and spiritual fellowship.

That is a profoundly distorted view of mainstream Christianity and is evidence of the fantasy world the cult member is immersed in. The average cult member puts all their eggs in one basket and stakes all on a single manifestation of Christian community. Likewise Ken has staked his career on AiG and therefore he's under-pressure to not just make dogmatic statements about his beliefs but to intimidate those Christians who are not as sold-out and dogmatic as he is. 

 ***

One thing I am pretty dogmatic about is this: Ken Ham has become cultish in his thinking, a Trump voting politico-religious bully prepared to call down hell and hamnation on his antagonists without compunction whether they be atheists or non-sectarian Christians (See here). And yet young earthist beliefs need not go together with this religious badgering: See for example here where Christian Hank Hanegraaph contrasts Ken's aggressively expressed dogmatism with young earthist Paul Nelson. Ergo, young earthism need not necessarily entail the high-sectarianism of Ken's spiritually intimidating hard-sell linked to the financial interests of the theme park he runs. Another fundamentalist who expresses himself similarly to Ken is Kent Hovind.  

The Milwaukee independent article I have linked to at the head of this post is actually about political bullying, but many of its points port to the world of sectarian cult Christianity especially as in America nowadays large swathes of Christian evangelicalism are (too strongly) linked to the politics of hard nationalism.  The methods of the Adolf Hitlers, the Vlad Putins, the Donald Trumps, and the Ken Hams of this world sharply divide people by exploiting a mix of confusion, grievance, alienation, disaffection, discontent and fear. These pundits are the "great simplifiers" of life as they paint a fantasy world that is sharply divided between good stock and evil stock, the latter being the whipping boys who are to blame for all that's wrong with the world and onto whom one's hatred and fears can be pinned. 

Relevant Link

Views, News and Pews: Fundamentalist Publicity Sects. (viewsnewsandpews.blogspot.com

ADDENDUM 22/03/2022

In a post titled  Should Christians Send their Kids to Public Schools?, (dated 21ts March) Ken clearly comes out in favour of a "No!" to this question. He doesn't actually say "No!" any more than he has said "Vote Trump" even though it's clear that he very likely voted Trump. This aversion to a state education further reinforces Ken's cult credentials: A cult needs as much time as possible to indoctrinate its young people and therefore Ken wants his young people out of state schools. The Jehovah's witnesses are also averse to the state school system and don't recommend that their young people attend university, probably because it takes them out of the cult context.

I was very interested to see this post on PZ Myers blog: It seems that the atheists have spotted Ken Ham's increasing extremism and his drift toward the far-right. In this connection I was particularly interested in the remarks about AiG's link to a far-right web publicist(s) who has gone under the names of "Harry F Sanders III" and "Emory Monagh". This person (or persons), it is alleged, has all but advocated right-wing violence and antisemitic conspiracy theories. This fits together well with Ken's implicit support of Trump and QAnon.  Given these rather serious charges Ken has some explaining to do. (I'm not holding my breath waiting for it!)

Footnote

*  There are those who believe any claim to a conscious first-person perspective is an illusion. I regard such an opinion as stupid and a result of being fooled by the linguistic imprecision of natural language, a language which can always be cast into a third person mode.

Trumptruth News: A Putin-Trump axis of evil?

Putin's useful idiot

Unlike Vladimir Putin, whose belligerent aims are bound up with his dream of a formidable Holy Russian Empire, Donald Trump isn't driven by any ideology. For Donald Trump, for whom the word "narcissist" often recurs in society's commentaries about him, the only ideology he is over the moon about is himself. Trump reminds me of a spoilt child who thinks that when he shuts is eyes, we all go away. He's full of his own importance, thinks he's the best in the world and screams & stamps when he's crossed. In order to curry support, he tells people what they want to hear whether they be QAnon supporters or Christain fundamentalists. 

Republican and conservative leaning voters will often say they like Trump's policies. Well, whether they are good policies or not is actually beside the point because Trump is simply reflecting back at them what they want to hear in order to get their vote. The other thing Trump is good at is finding the scapegoats the conservatives love to hate and pin the blame on for all that they perceive to be rotten in society. This "polarize and accuse" strategy can be a real vote winner; it's the first stage along the road to conspiracy theorism.

But whatever your politics, whether conservative or not, if Trump perceives you as a threat in some way you become the target of his insults, lies and conspiracy theories. Take for example Republican right-winger Ron Desantis. You might at first expect Ronald and Donald to get on well because of a common conservative vision. But no, Donald's vision is all about his own path to glory: Therefore, because Ronald appears to be a rival presidential candidate, Donald regards Ronald as a threat worthy of insult and sleight. If you don't support Trump in the way that he wants he may even invent a conspiracy theory about you. 

Trump finds useful idiots to support his cause, like Mike Pence, although thankfully brave Mike Pence defected in favour of American democracy at the price of becoming a traitor in the eyes of Trump and his potentially violent supporters. Another useful idiot was fundamentalist & Christian influencer Michael Brown, who boasts voting for the Trump presidency twice. But underneath it Brown, like Pence, is actually a reasonable man and can probably see through Trump; he now advises his followers that someone else needs to take up the conservative cause other than Trump. That won't go down well with either Trump or his supporters. But really, Brown should come out much more strongly against Trump than he has and condemn Trump for his immorality and above all his attack on American democracy. But no, Brown continues to pussy foot about because he knows that his influencer base has many Trump supporters and therefore he can't risk offending them. Consequently, Brown has to mince his words when he tells his constituency as nicely as possible that they should think of voting for someone else. The upshot is that Brown never makes it clear just how close America came to letting in a Wanna-Be-Dictator.  (See here for more on Pence and Brown). 

Pence and Brown might at one time have been useful idiots for Trump, but it seems that Trump himself  remains a useful idiot for Vlad Putin. In this connection it was no surprise to hear recent reports coming in about Trump loudly proclaiming that he trusts Putin more than he does the American security services simply because they haven't stroked Trump's planet sized ego, unlike Putin who knows a useful idiot when he sees one.  See below for links to some of those reports 

I also hear a rumour that cranky Christian conspiracy theorist Marjorie Taylor-Green is aspiring to be Trump's running mate for the next Presidental campaign. That may actually be a good thing: Taylor-Green is such a clown that surely the American voting public will see that Trump can't be a serious presidential candidate.....They will see that won't they? ....Won't they? On the other hand, worst luck, perhaps Trump, who knows what best serves his interests will also see this and refuse her help!

Trump's presidential campaign running mate?

Summing up I would say this: World-wide we are seeing a miscellany of nationalist and Christain traditionalists who feel they are losing the culture war and aspire to turn back the clock, perhaps by force, perhaps even by syndicating with the "devil" in order to promote their cause. Ironically the culture war has its origins in the Protestant revolution whose culture of individual choice has led to the rich liberal democracies of the West. And in a further irony: As Protestantism encouraged its people (like the Bereans of Acts 17:11-1), to turn to the scriptures and come to their own conclusions, many have come out of that long drawn-out blue pill vs. red pill process as unbelievers. But it would be wrong to say they are unaffected by Christianity. Much Christain morality still pervades Western culture at least in terms of lip-service. Therefore, in the West the conflict can almost be caricatured as a conflict between authoritarian Christian traditionalists and liberal Christain secularists. 

Relevant Link:

Trump news - live: Trump opens 2024 campaign battle with ‘heinous’ DeSantis posts after mocking Biden address (msn.com)

Trump trusts Putin more than America's security services.

Trump makes shocking comments about trusting Putin over US ‘intelligence lowlifes’ (yahoo.com)

Trump makes shocking comments about trusting Putin over US ‘intelligence lowlifes’ | The Independent

Trump Suggests, Yet Again, He Trusts Putin Over U.S. Intelligence 'Lowlifes' (yahoo.com)

Trump: I need more lawyers than Al Capone and trust Putin over intelligence 'lowlifes' | Daily Mail Online

Donald Trump Says He Trusts Putin More Than U.S. Intelligence 'Lowlifes' (newsweek.com)

Below I've copied in one of the web articles.

Trump shocks nation with claim about trusting Putin over US intelligence

Trump shocks nation with claim about trusting Putin over US intelligence (msn.com)

Is the former president just a fool or is he playing a bigger game?

Since Donald Trump hit the political scene there has been a debate over whether he’s in the pocket of Russian President Vladimir Putin or if he’s just a fool, an argument that has only intensified after the former president’s shocking Truth Social comments on Monday

Americans should trust Putin over their intelligence services

In a move that seemed wholly ill-thought-out, Trump suggested that Americans would be better served trusting Putin over their own intelligence services. 

"Remember when I was asked who I trusted?"

“Remember in Helsinki when a 3rd rate reporter asked me, essentially, who I trusted more, President Putin of Russia, or our ‘Intelligence’ lowlifes,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Monday. 

Trump derides America's intelligence services

“My instinct at the time was that we had really bad people in the form of James Comey, McCabe (whose wife was being helped out by Crooked Hillary while Crooked was under investigation!),” Trump continued. 

"Do you trust Putin or these misfits?

“Brennan, Peter Strzok (whose wife is at the SEC) & his lover, Lisa Page. Now add McGonigal & other slime to the list. Who would you choose, Putin or these Misfits?” Trump added. 

Who would you choose?

While the question “Who would you choose?” might have enraged political moderates and left-wingers alike, the question does make sense for the audience Trump is speaking to according to The Independent’s Washinton correspondent John Bowden.

John Bowden's comments

"It’s an example of the kind of comment that will gin up excitement and agreement from Mr. Trump’s hardcore base of supporters,” Bowden wrote.

The fastest way to alienate allies

Bowden added, however, that Trump's comment would also “alienate potential allies in Washington as he pursues a third bid for the presidency.”

Facing a crowded primary

The former president is likely to face a host of new faces on the campaign trail this year, one of which could be the former CIA director Mike Pompeo according to Bowden. 

 

An explanation for Trump’s comments

Trump may not be as dim-witted as we think then, if he’s already casting suspicion on his potential GOP primary rivals. But how will he fare in the general election with comments that seemingly praise America’s current number-one enemy?

We can expect a lot more of this from Trump

Phillip Elliot of Time Magazine believes we’re likely to see more toxicity from Trump this time around after analyzing the former president's 2024 primary campaign kickoff keynote speech in New Hampshire.

Things might be more toxic than in the past

“The event’s tone and substance suggested the looming two-year campaign is going to match—if not surpass—the toxic tone of his past attempts,” Elliot wrote.

Marinating in hate

“He has been marinating in exile for the last two years, imagining his revenge comeback and stewing in his grievances,” Elliot added. 

The intelligence agency's are a primary target

It would seem then, that Trump has made the American intelligence community one of his prime targets for his rage and toxicity this year, regardless of how it might affect the future of the American people or the war in Ukraine. 

 

Trump's recent comments about ending the war in Ukraine

The former president has never been a fan of how Joe Biden has handled the war in Ukraine, and he also believes he can do a better job—recently stating that he would end the conflict "within 24 hours" through negotiation with Putin.

Not the first time Trump has backed Putin

Trump's Monday Truth Social post wasn't the first time he's backed Putin over the interests of the American people.

Maybe he is a fool after all...

In 2021, the former president wrote in a June 10th statement that "it should be obvious" who he trusts more when choosing between Russia and America's intelligence agencies. So maybe he is just a fool after all.