Two posts that may seem unrelated actually touch upon similar themes. I want to address this issue directly, because I haven't before, and I think it is important to make my position as clear as possible. Over here at Street Prophets is a discussion of the recent meeting of Christians United For Israel, held in Washington, DC. Among the guest speakers were former Rep. Tom DeLay and current Senator Joe Lieberman. Max Blumenthal attended, but was kicked out when he asked an actual question, but managed to videotape some pretty scary stuff, not the least of which was Tom DeLay saying he hopes for the Second Coming of Christ. After hearing him, so do I, so I won't have to listen to him anymore.
Over Hullabaloo, tristero has a great post on the mainstreaming of the rhetoric of the John Birch society. As someone who has a copy of the original Blue Book of Robert Welch, I have known about this for some time. I'm not surprised others didn't, but I am glad tristero managed to get it out in the open, so we can be clear we are dealing with lunatics here.
In both cases, the general topic is the fringe nature of much of right-wing rhetoric. Over at Street Prophets, there is much earnest surprise, a la Capt. Reynaud in Casablanca, that right-wing Christians would have the ear of prominent conservative politicians. This is something we need to concern ourselves about, for some reason. As I noted in comments, who do they think Bush and the rest of them are going to listen to, a United Methodist Bishop?
There is a connection between these two that goes back a more than a generation. In right-wing circles the great-grand-daddy of Christian political fundamentalism is a guy with the unlikely name of Rousas John Rushdoony. He connected both the Birchers and the Christian Right back when it was still considered a fringe movement, even as it had millions of followers and hangers-on. Learned but narrow, devout but dogmatic, having no charisma yet having many followers, Rushdoony managed to set the agenda by which most of the Christian Right continues to live and work.
A key element of the right has always been the recognition of the United States as a Christian nation, ruled by the Word and Law of God. starting last summer, several books appeared that breathlessly explained the coming danger of the Christian Reconstruction movement, whose goal is stated above. I laughed when I first saw them; Kevin Phillips and Amy Sullivan apparently thought no one had been paying attention for the past twenty-five years as these people took their extreme rhetoric and goals mainstream. Alas, I was wrong, and even among those who should know better, Christians of a certain progressive bent, there was surprise and anger over the realization that certain elements of the Christian faith posed a dangerous and immediate threat to our current secular society.
I laughed then, and I laugh now. They may have emerged from the shadows, as it were, but just because people are suddenly paying attention to them does not mean they are any closer to their goal, or we need fear the sudden rise of theocracy. Just as the Christian Right is dwindling in power and influence, all these mainstream journalists suddenly become aware of some of the more extreme instances and policy goals of their agenda, and we are supposed to all be either surprised or afraid? As one commenter at Street Prophets told me, they are not to be underestimated (cue minor-key strings playing threatening undertones).
Why should it surprise anyone that Pres. Bush listens to the kind of Christians that echo his political beliefs? Just because a bunch of Christians advocate bombing Iran somehow makes it more dangerous than when Lieberman or Charles Krauthammer demand the same thing from a non-religious point of view? Please. . .
I am less worried about theocracy than I am with simple lawlessness and de facto authoritarian government. At Street Prophets I called these people at CUFI ignorant, bigoted clowns. I was told that contempt was dangerous and convinced no one. I repeat what I said there - I hold their views in contempt, not them as persons. For the record, the kind of earnest seriousness that leads people to lecture others on just how dangerous these theocrats are is just as annoying to me as contempt is to other people. By treating them as the ridiculous figures they are, I at least keep them in proper perspective.
