WWW Talk To Action



The Indian River Incident : What You Can Do

link > The "Stop the ACLU Coalition" Shaming Project
How you can help stop "Stop The ACLU" just by sending a few emails



 'Left Behind' video game imageThe Shaming Project

does the violence of "Left Behind: Eternal Forces" bother you ? If so, what can you do ? Well, to begin with you can email Jonathan Hutson's stories to people you know. That will help to bring more public scrutiny of the game. Public shaming really works ! Just click on the "email" icon and link at the top or bottom of the story and you'll be taken to a form that will allow you email the first story, The Purpose Driven Life Takers or the latest installment without leaving this site. Thanks. 'Left Behind' video game image




Drawing the Right Lessons from the Right
By Frederick ClarksonSun Jan 08, 2006 at 11:10:03 PM EST
topic: All Topics section:Front Page printable version print this story
I believe that there are many political lessons to be learned from the Religious Right and the wider conservative movement.  It is one of the most successful social and political movements in recent American history.

As someone who has observed it's rise for 25 years or so, it is heartening and refreshing to see that people are paying more attention than they used to, and are even taking some lessons from the movement's successes.

But what happens if people draw the wrong lessons?

Jean Hardisty and Deepak Bhargava offered some answers recently in an eye-opening essay in The Nation.

In their article titled Wrong about the Right, the authors take exception to the "lessons" taken from the right by elements of the Democratic Party establishment and liberal interest groups.

Indeed, it seems to me that much of what now passes for the conventional wisdom about the right is wrong -- and conveniently tends to support that status quo. Unfortunately, it is the status quo that got us to where we are today.

Hardisty and Bhargava don't just challenge the conventional wisdom's take on the right.  They also offer a strategic vision that is worth thoroughly taking in.

Here are a few excerpts:

The now dominant narrative about the right's rise to power holds that conservatives invested huge amounts of money in a number of think tanks over the past thirty years and brilliantly framed their messages in ways that were simple and resonated deeply with much of the American public. By embracing a top-down, hierarchical movement structure and relentless message discipline, the right was able not only to triumph at the ballot box but also to change the very terms of political discussion-- demonizing "big government" and celebrating "tax relief," "personal responsibility" and "free-market capitalism."

This account of conservative strategy has piqued the interest of a growing number of progressive groups, who argue that the left should adopt a similar strategy. And it is currently driving the activities of many major progressive donors.

The difficulty here is that, as an explanation of the right's ascendancy, it is at best incomplete and at worst misleading. What's more, it is not clear that progressives should emulate all of the right's tactics, or that we will succeed by doing so. There are certainly lessons to be learned from the right -- but for the most part they are different from those commonly assumed.....

Our current infatuation with the strategies and structures of the right has led some progressives to call for a more streamlined, hierarchical movement, but this is not how we've won in the past. Progressive movements have been successful when they have not had a top-down organizational structure. Also, this analysis fails to appreciate the comprehensiveness of the right's movement-building style. And it does not reflect progressive democratic principles....

Organizing has always had an uneasy place not only in the broader culture but also in progressive circles. It has frequently been sidelined by expert-driven advocacy or by charismatic figures who lead short-lived protest movements, and today it is at risk of being displaced by a focus on think tanks and communications strategies. Perhaps more alarming, however, is the relative decline of organizing as a strategy relative to mobilization. The work of many 527 organizations prominent in the Bush and Kerry campaigns of 2004 (America Coming Together and the Media Fund, for example) seemed to be about parachuting into communities and soliciting votes, with little thought about what would be left behind.

One of their additional points I want to briefly discuss.

Ideas, Not Messages. To the extent that conservatives were serious about ideas--and to be sure they were and are--they started not with "messaging" or "framing," two strategies currently in vogue among progressives, but rather with inquiry into core beliefs about race, government, family, markets and global economic and military domination.

The urge to rush into devising "messages" is a tendency among many who are seeking to respond to the right in general, and the religious right in particular.  Such headlong rushes into "message" often results in a kind of radical reductionism in which we  find ourselves engaged in the microsemantics of bumperstickers -- rather than considering the fullness of the religious right as a movement, developing some understanding of why and how it has been successful, and what kinds of changes other sectors of society might reasonably undertake to counter it.  

Message politics is tempting in part because it is a task that seems safe and manageable. 'Everything will be better if only we have the right message.' Or, 'this message will completely discredit them!' And so on. It also allows us to kid ourselves and others, when we have little actual knowledge on which to base our ideas. "Message" has all to often substituted for "strategy." But this is exactly backwards. Messages are are an outgrowth of, and but one tactical component of strategy.

One version of message politics sometimes happens in discussions about what to call the religious right and it's various subsidiary parts.

It is time to refocus this kind of conversation.

One of the first things that usually needs to change is the routine use of epithets -- when what are needed are fair and accurate descriptive terms. For example, if we label everyone with whom we disagree as "extremists," or "wingnuts" how do we even know who we are talking about? How can we evaluate different groups, their tendencies and capacities if we radically limit our vocabulary to terms of disparagement? Or more simply put, how can we even have an intelligent conversation?

While some of us have been talking about these matters of language for years, it has taken a particular urgency as the rise of the blogosphere has created a whole new and dynamic medium in which what we used to call "the printed word" takes on a whole new kind of power and significance.

Chip Berlet has done more than anyone else to challenge the conventional wisdom with regard to the uses and misuses of language in response to the right.  Beginning in May, he posted a series of essays on his web site and at Talk to Action. For example, back in May, he noted that Rev. Martin Luther King wrote his famous Letter from the Birmingham Jail, in part in response to being labeled an "extremist":

King wrote that he considered the label, and then realized that in their respective days, the Biblical Amos, Abraham Lincoln, and Thomas Jefferson had all been thought of as extremists by mainstream society. King responded, "So the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or will we be extremists for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice--or will we be extremists for the cause of justice?"

Two issues are raised by King's clever reversal of the attack on him as an "extremist."

First is that the term "extremist" has only relative meaning in terms of how far outside the "mainstream" norms of society a particular idea or act is located by some observer who claims a "centrist" position.

Second, King suggests it is important to determine whether any idea or action labeled as "extremist" defends or extends justice, equality, or democracy--or whether it defends or extends unfair power or privilege.

Ultimately, the concept of "extremism" is of little value in discussing prejudice, ethnocentrism, or the Christian Right. Sociologist Jerome Himmelstein argues the term "extremism" is at best a characterization that "tells us nothing substantive about the people it labels," and at worst the term "paints a false picture."

Similarly, standard terms like "evangelical" and "fundamentalist" (or the colloquial variant, "fundies") are sometimes used, in ignorance, to disparage people with whom one disagrees in religion and/or politics. If, in acting out of ignorance people use standard religious identities embraced and held dear by millions as terms of disparagement, is it any wonder that many of those same people, (or even the simply religiously literate) believe they are hearing the words of religious bigots?

I realize that this can be hard for many progressives to hear.

But if we are to own the moral high ground on matters of social justice, equality, and religious freedom, we must not fall into the bad habits of language and mind that are rooted at once in prejudice and, as discussed by Chip Berlet and Martin Luther King, bad framing.

While it is important to develop our vocabulary, and define our terms so that we can clearly and effectively communicate with each other and with a wider public -- again, let's not confuse this with message. It is still necessary for us to know what we are talking about in order to effectively use the terms we choose.  If we know what we are talking about, and seek to speak not from the standpoint of ignorance and prejudice, we will find the right words. In the meantime, while avoiding epithets, there is still no substitute for a set of commonly agreed upon terms to help us navigate a body of knowledge, even as we are aquiring that knowledge.

Chip Berlet's series on dominionism and theocracy is a big step in this direction, providing useful definitions and a knowledgeable context. I made my own recent foray into defining dominionism and applied the term in reporting some specific contemporary political circumstances.

Whether we are dealing with matters of learning; and learning to talk about the right and its component parts more effectively; and drawing appropriate political lessons from the right as Hardisty and Bhargava suggest, I have emphasized that there are some other, concrete tasks we could be considering.  And when I say "we" I mean the participants in the blogosphere.

The blogosphere is a new and powerful tool for communications and organizing. Making it accessible to people who we think could make effective use of it -- ought to be part of any of the organizing strategies of the major progressive movements of our time.

But I think to do that, we need to consider how to develop a more nuts-and-bolts approach of putting this powerful tool in more people's hands -- by doing targeted outreach to people who already have the technical infrastructure and capacity to use it; and by seeking to make the infrastructure and the  capacity to use it, accessible to those who can benefit from the extraordinary potential of the blogosphere, but who are not yet involved.  

Can the progressive blogosphere live up to it's potential? And can it be effective in catalyzing, informing and enhancing the kind of social movements, and organizing strategies that Hardisty and Bhargava see as essential to counter the rise of the right?

I think so.

But it is uncharted territory.




Display:
the blogosphere will have grown exponentially.

But will it have grown strategically?  

I hope that Talk to Action participants will develop personal strategies for expanding our readership, and if possible, helping others to overcome any obstacles they may have to participation.

I think that empowering our personal networks to access the blogosphere is one thing most of us can plan to do over the next year.

by Frederick Clarkson on Sun Jan 08, 2006 at 11:51:10 PM EST

  The Interfaith Alliance of the Capital District of New York is in the process of establishing a committee to examine the activities of the religious right.  Most of the organization is computer illiterate.  This year I made just one resolution.  That is to make Talk to Action visible to older, less computer savvy social and political religious organizers.  Tomorrow I start facilitating my resolution at the first meeting of the year.

by tikkun on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 12:53:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I hope you'll share with us what you learn along the way. Undoubtedly you will come away with a good list of do's and don'ts.

Incidentally, in my area, there is a good used computer equipment store, where one can put together systems cheap, or even pick up laptops cheaply. They are mostly reconditioned student cast-offs from the five college area (Northampton/Amherst MA).

I am also on a list serve of tech people and businesses who ocasionally give away old equipment to non-profit organizations. If I can be of help, let me know.  

by Frederick Clarkson on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 01:11:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]




I believe that effective message framing is necessary, but not a magic bullet, and not sufficient in itself. We will win because our ideas are more compelling, and our vision is more inclusive. And while effective message framing (or, one might say, effective story-telling, or an effective appeal to shared, fundamental values) is important, it does not replace having boots on the ground -- that is, organizing and coalition building. And the field of organizing and coalition building extends not only to electoral campaigns, but also to the arts, community relations, media relations, and the blogosphere. We need to harness the power of our constituency to refine and communicate our ideas. Better ideas plus more people who share, advocate, and act on those ideas, equals victory for defenders of democracy.

by jhutson on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 03:52:49 AM EST

I know this isn't exactly the popular perspective on this site, but I've said it before, so here goes.  In terms of "developing our vocabulary" ...  

A better term than dominionism is needed.

Dominionism does not roll off the tongue.  It is not only not a word that is easy to say -- it is not easy to read; it is not easy to spell; it does not have a clinky-clanky bell-ringing sound that connects to its meaning; and it doesn't have a sticky quality.

I know some words get incorporated into the language, but I don't hold out hope for this one.  'Dominionism' always takes an explanation, which usually boils down to religious right or theocrats (for the better informed).  I've used it with both extremely literate and those on down the informed scale, and all find it difficult and confusing.  Honestly, when I see it, my mind goes through several steps that include Domino's Pizza(possibly appropriate given its right wing former owner) and Domain, the home products store.

What else?  I don't know.  How about the the 'take-over' religions, or the take over religious promoters.  (They do want to take over our lives and our individual wills and our government, so it has the same domineering quality.  Plus, it harkens to corporatists with whom the religious right aligns, and has a real-people ring to it.)  And then those fancy academic types can use dominionism, and real people can say, you know, the take-over types.

Anyhow, I'd like to see this use of language explored further.  Good words have character and temperment and sound and pop off the tongue -- not just a definition  (Blog is a perfect example.)


by cyncooper on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 10:56:12 AM EST

I am not suggesting universal usage of the term dominionism. I didn't advocate its universal use in my article in The Public Eye, and I didn't advocate it here.

My main point on the matter of language, is that it doesn't matter as much as some people think, exactly what words we use, what matters most is that we know what we are talking about when we use them. There are different terms to use for different occasions. The term dominionism will be useful in some contexts, and certainly not others. I think it will have wider resonance over time than you do.

Ten years ago, many people thought I was out of my mind because I said that there was a theocratic movement afoot in the United States. But I argued in Eternal Hostility that while the term theocracy or theocratic might not ever make it into wide public use, people who write and think about politics and religion need to be able to use it and apply it, lest our analysis and our writing be dumbed down.  

Here is part of what I wrote in my recent Public Eye piece on dominionism.

Since The Public Eye first began writing about dominionism ten years ago, the movement, broadly defined, has gained considerable power. Recently however, the term has become fashionable with some lumping every form of evangelical Christianity and every faction in the Bush White House into one big, single-minded imperial dominionist plot. Dominionism is narrower and more profound than that. It is the driving ideology of the Christian Right.

I do not think we need to invent any new terms. I think we need to use the terms we have well.

by Frederick Clarkson on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 01:33:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]


To "Christian Supremacy" , as a subset of "religious supremacy" . But ( and this line should be credited to Fred, Chip, or both ) no one single term will do. I'd suggest a well-chosen palette.

by Bruce Wilson on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 02:07:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

How about using the word arrogant.  I think it is accurate and gives a good description of their dynamic.  I'm just not sure how to make it into a noun.

by pondside on Tue Jan 10, 2006 at 09:07:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Why do you suggest the word 'arrogant'?  I assume that arrogance can apply to any number of people of all persuasions.  So I am curious about why you find it particularly appropriate?  

(I see that Fred wants to call off the language search, and, I assume, focus on substance.  In my mind, there is a dynamic that travels back and forth between substance and representative words, and knowing why you select arrogant is part of that.)

by cyncooper on Tue Jan 10, 2006 at 10:46:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Let me be clear.  I think the "what to call them" issue is a dead end and has been explored, without really advancing the matter, for DECADES.

I think we have a reasonable palette of generic terms -- religious right and Christian right work just fine for me -- for routine, non-pejorative use in describing the social and political movement at issue here.  The notion of a dominionist movement is a useful analytical concept, well justified by the research and accepted by academics, who may differ in some of the details. It is already a term grossly misused, particularly around the blogosphere, so I tend to use it with caution.

I used, and may have coined (I dunno) the phrase religious supremacism to descibe some characteristics of elements of the Christian Right, and mentioned it as a specific characteristic of dominionism in my recent article in The Public Eye.

by Frederick Clarkson on Tue Jan 10, 2006 at 12:56:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]


I think it's an appropriate adjective for those who speak for God, for those who think they can dictate what my innermost feelings are or should be, and for those who act like know it alls.  It also has a negative connotation, at least to me, and is not a quality usually associated with spirituality.  What do you think?

by pondside on Tue Jan 10, 2006 at 10:35:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I agree that the Religious Right leaders may be arrogant. But there are arrogant know it alls, as you say, in just about every area from art to science to media and to law.  So I consider it a characteristic that can apply to lots of folks, some of whom are not even remotely part of the Religious Right.

 

by cyncooper on Wed Jan 11, 2006 at 12:44:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]





word which seems to hit the nail on the head:

Godism.

Given where so much of the right's funding comes from, it seems apt.

by Len on Sun Jan 15, 2006 at 08:43:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]



Yes, I agree with Cyn that while the term dominionism provides an accurate description, its immediate meaning is elusive, and it is not likely to be adopted in popular usage for that reason and because it is difficult to pronounce and spell.

What one wants is a shorter "handle" that is easy to say and intuitively understood. Take-over theology or might do nicely. Meanwhile, here are some other descriptions to play with: Christian commandeers, disciples of domination, sanctimonious supremacists.

Tell the truth, now. When you hear, "disciples of domination," what do you think of? Men in tight black outfits, dungeons, chains, and whips? In that case, yes, Torquemada, you're on the right track. Although no words can fully prepare us for the full-on torture of theocracy for, as Monty Python says, "No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!"

Yet I can see it now: a Christian youth rally, rockin' out to the Christian Commandeers, backed by a black-clad line of dancing doowoppers, the Disciples of Domination...

by jhutson on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 11:33:18 AM EST
I'm rather hesitant to use the term "Christian" to describe dominionists at all:

a) Many of the dominionist-supporting churches actually qualify as spiritually abusive groups

b) Most moderate and liberal Christians get highly offended if you lump them in with dominionists or even refer to them as "Christian" because there is some evidence that mainstream Christianity is being affected negatively by the actions of dominionists (in regards to people's perception of Christianity in general)

One thing I think we need to emphasize is that these groups are not only not like mainstream Christianity, but share many of the hallmarks of more well known spiritually abusive groups (this hopefully to keep these groups from getting more members and to keep them from setting root in mainstream churches, and also as a method of welcome to those who have walked away and realise something is seriously broken).

Some of the education, I know, is probably going to (and I'm thinking largely in terms of churches and schools here) go even beyond discussion of dominionism itself and more towards encouraging skills in critical thinking and basic education in how coercive groups in general work.  (I know some folks do disagree, but based on my own experience growing up in a coercive religious group that is part of a denomination that essentially spawned the modern dominionist movement I do think the "core" dominionist movement has many of the same characteristics as more conventional spiritually-abusive groups and one does have to consider the fact that in regards to the "core" of dominionism we may be dealing with people in what is literally a cultic mindset.  (This is more likely with what has been referred to here as "Hard Dominionism"--"Christian Nationalist" and "Christian Reconstructionist" promoters.  "Soft Dominionists" may actually be more willing to leave when it's shown that the behaviour of these groups, and the underlying scripture-twisting that is the basis of dominionism, is anything but Christian.)

One thing that will need to be watched is targeting of the Latino community (both by dominionist-friendly churches--the AoG has been attempting prosyletisation in Latin America for decades and even has occasionally directly interfered in Latin American politics, and is trying to spawn dominionist movements in Latin America--and by "sheep-stealing" from Latino Catholic and Protestant churches).  There are signs that the pro-life contingent of the dominionist movement is already starting race-baiting.

One thing that needs to be watched in general is the whole sheep-stealing thing and attempts to split denominations; the Southern Baptists were successfully hijacked (forcing a split), a similar attempt at hijacking (not so successful but may force a split) is going on with the Presbyterian church (led by groups with ties to racist organisations like League of the South that are also friendly towards dominionist groups), the Episcopalian church has been targeted, the Methodist church is often talked of as the next major dominionist target (ironically, the pentecostal movement--where much of dominionism's base theology originated--is itself a split from Methodist movements) and even the Catholic Church itself could be targeted.

Terminology is problematic.  Again, partly because I don't want to scare away moderate Christians, I'm not sure we should use "Christian <foo>" to describe dominionism.  At the same time, one of the best terms I've ever heard describing hard dominionists ("Talibangelicals") may be seen as flippant.

by dogemperor on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 01:00:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]


I am not aware of anyone proposing dominionism as a one size fits all term. There are different terms that are appropriate for different ocasions.

I don't think there is any one term that will ever serve all ocasions, and I urge everyone to call off the search.


by Frederick Clarkson on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 02:04:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]



Although I do use the terms "extremists" and "fundamentalists" in my talks, I very specifically define the terms within these narrow groups and movements (such as "the currrent political leaders running our government are not conservatives but extremists," followed by examples). I would suggest better terms including, "anti-democratic", "anti-pluralistic" and "anti-constitutional." The right invests a lot of time and energy defining us as beng AGAINST things, but FOR nothing - we can turn that right back at them, thus defining what is important to us.

by joelp on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 12:21:44 PM EST

I'm in agreement with everyone on the whole "message" and "framing" discussion, and the growing importance of blogging... (Anyone for revisiting Marhsall McLuhan's "the Medium is the Massage"??)

However, I also observe something else of note in the rise of the Religious Right... they managed to create a population of folks who, for lack of a better term, are "sheep".  These are people who at some point during the rise of the RR, bought into the movement, and internalized that the leaders of the RR speak for them... these people latched onto the RR movement as representing them and their interests and values.  

What is particularly of note, is that many of these "sheep" people don't fully understand the issues at hand.  If you asked them to articulate why they agree with a specific RR point of view, they would most likely give you a general "they understand my values" answer, rather than a specific answer.  These folks have gotten to the point where if a RR leader is quoted in the media as being against something, they agree, simply because they have taken on the group identity...

This form of groupthink is something that I feel warrants some additional study... particularly about how to combat it without duplicating the practice on our end.

I also agree that we need some sort of descriptive catchphrase... I've been using "theocrats" myself - since I think it sums up what the RR are after... however, since most of the RR keep denying that they are looking to establish a theocracy - perhaps that's not the best phrase...

And a note to Jonathan - I'm seeing a new Mel Brooks or Monty Python film in development here... or perhaps a collaboration?  =o)

-Emily
emilywynn.blogspot.com


by EmilyWynn8 on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 12:35:26 PM EST


When I discovered the below, written primarily by Thomas Jefferson,


 "...our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions, any more than our opinions in physics or geometry [the sciences, my words]...and finally, that truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them". "The Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom"

it encapsulated what I believe the majority of the Founders of  our country believed and what the majority of Christians (or any religion in fact) wish to have:

the freedom to bring into the civil debate their religious views (opinions) and have them be granted the same equal respect as other inputs (opinions), such as the sciences.

If the goal is the search for "truth" associated with the burning issues of the day, then no one should fear allowing religious views from being allowed in the debate, because without allowing such, then the search for truth has been "disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate".

So when someone says that the First Amendment is also about "freedom from religion", this makes no sense within the context the founding of our country.

Those against the "Religious Right" would go a long way in conceding that those with "religious opinions" have just as much a constitutional right to bring their views to the debate as views of those against the "Religious Right".

Again, if truth is what you seek, then what do those against the "Religious Right" have to fear? Maybe it is just free itself.

by Vaclav on Mon Jan 09, 2006 at 06:14:38 PM EST


Left Behind: Eternal Forces: Installments of Jonathan Hutson's Talk To Action expose series on the "Left Behind: Eternal Forces" video game have been viewed by up to 1/2 million people. See our site section featuring Over 35 original articles covering the controversial "Left Behind: Eternal Forces" video game that has provoked a boycott by a coalition of religious groups and a letter writing campaign urging Walmart to stop selling the game. Media inquiries click here
(image: detail from Francoise Dubois' rendition of the Bartholomew's Day Massacre reveals the actual nature of religious warfare)

Short Takes
TFN Insider: The Texas Freedom Network reveals that "An intelligent design" supporter of today is a creationist with a thesaurus." Religion Dispatches: The immoderate,......
By Frederick Clarkson (0 comments)
Holiday Harangue: Utah Lawmaker Wants To Mandate `Merry Christmas'
The Religious Right's annual whine-fest about the "War on Christmas" is coming along right on schedule. James Dobson has issued his list of "naughty......
By Rob Boston (1 comment)
Organizing in Response to Fred Phelps
Rev. Fred Phelps, the vile anti-gay activist and head of Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas, will make several stops in Boston on December 12th,......
By Frederick Clarkson (6 comments)
Creationism: The Latest In Military Suicide Prevention
Here at the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), we get countless complaints about religiously based mental health and counseling programs, which, over the past......
By Chris Rodda (5 comments)
Short Takes
The Public Eye:  Chip Berlet shows how knowledge of the various submovements and ideologies of the Religious Right, matters. (As distinct from the mindless......
By Frederick Clarkson (0 comments)
Loony List: James Dobson Tells Us Who's Been Naughty And Nice
The day after Thanksgiving is "Black Friday," the traditional start of the December holiday shopping season. Nervous retailers are watching the bottom line, fretful......
By Rob Boston (4 comments)
Revelation of an Afterword
Jeff Sharlet has let the cat out of the bag by posting his Afterword to Dispatches from the Religious Left at The Revealer (the......
By Frederick Clarkson (0 comments)
The Oogedy-Boogedy Gap, Defined
It was not so long ago that liberals and Democrats were wringing their hands about how more deeply religious voters were tending to vote......
By Frederick Clarkson (16 comments)
Why Religious Heritage Battles Matter
For a variety of reasons, folks of different ideologies want to "claim" the Founding. If their heritage gave it to us, as the theory......
By Jonathan Rowe (0 comments)
Documentary Explores Evangelicals for Obama and Dissatisfaction with Republican Party
The UK's Channel 4 has just broadcast a documentary about American evangelical dissatisfaction with the Republican Party and increasing support for the Democrats. Entitled......
By Richard Bartholomew (1 comment)
What Obama Owes Catholic Voters
The Catholic Right-Part, Seventy-three Some Catholics think President-elect Obama owes American Catholics something for providing him with a 54% plurality. As Frederick Clarkson recently......
By Frank Cocozzelli (4 comments)
The Religious Right's 'War on Christmas' Began Centuries Ago
As Talk To Action writer Frederick Clarkson observes, proclamations from Bill O'Reilly, claiming the existence of a leftist assault on Christmas, are "part of......
By Bruce Wilson (3 comments)
Blaming the War on Christmas on -- You Know Who
As we enter into the season of overheated and half-baked claims about the desacrilization of the Jewish and Christian holiday season, led by Bill......
By Frederick Clarkson (5 comments)
Short Takes
Daily Kos: Diarist John Campanelli shows what's wrong with next-generation Religious Right leader Huck's take on gay rights. Buzzflash:  Bill Berkowitz surfaces the deep......
By Frederick Clarkson (3 comments)
Beating of Jewish Soldier at Fort Benning Turns Allies Into Foes
Just over a year ago, Sgt. Brian Kresge of the website Jews in Green had nothing but praise for Mikey Weinstein, founder and president......
By Chris Rodda (0 comments)
What's next for the Religious Right? Back to the Future.
After the collapse of the Moral Majority in the late `80's and the during the rise of the Christian Coalition, another movement, (or better description) of hysteria was sweeping over the country. It became......
By Stacey Tallitsch (1 comment)
After the election
Some observations I've made, now that the election has been over for several days (admittedly based only a few samples- but I think that they are telling): Unlike when Bush won (when conservatives were......
By ArchaeoBob (0 comments)
Shorter Dobson - Post-Election Special
James Dobson devoted two half-hour radio shows to his post-Obama victory thoughts along with a cadre of six other religious conservatives.  Here is a brief summary of their discussion... ......
By tacitus (5 comments)
Katherine Harris & Ken Malone, October 3, 2008
(what this story is really about): this post is an adjunct to a larger story, Katherine Harris, Sarah Palin Linked To Same Prayer Warfare Network which explores the fact that both Katherine Harris and......
By Bruce Wilson (1 comment)
Ignorance and Arrogance
Ignorance results primarily from two sources: poverty and privilege. Either denied an education or entitled to power, this isolation that enables ignorance breeds arrogance, and our society suffers from both.In an interview on American......
By Jay Taber (3 comments)
Imagining a Witchcraft-Fighting Vice President
Other recent Talk To Action stories on this subject Katherine Harris, Sarah Palin Linked To Same Prayer Warfare Network Palin's Movement Urges 'Godly' To 'Plunder' Wealth of 'Godless' Palin's Spiritual Warfare Network Partners With......
By Bruce Wilson (1 comment)
Spiritual Mapping and Spiritual Warfare - Muthee and the "Transformations" Franchise / 1
Palin's Churches and the Third Wave Series By The New Apostolic Reformation Research Team Introduction A video starring Thomas Muthee as a prayer warrior and witch hunter was released in 1999. "Transformations" was the......
By Ruth (0 comments)
Spiritual Mapping and Spiritual Warfare - Muthee and the "Transformations" Franchise / 2
Palin's Churches and the Third Wave Series By The New Apostolic Reformation Research Team Part Two (continued)part one     part three A video starring Thomas Muthee as a prayer warrior and witch hunter was released in 1999.......
By Ruth (1 comment)
Spiritual Mapping and Spiritual Warfare - Muthee and the "Transformations" Franchise / 3
Palin's Churches and the Third Wave Series By The New Apostolic Reformation Research Team Part Three (continued)part one     part two There are Transformations networks connected to Sentinel Group and "prayer warriors" under the authority of Wagner's......
By Ruth (0 comments)
Rev Andrew Weaver: A Fighter for Justice to the End
In the world of the intertubes the word "friend" has taken on a whole new meaning. A friend can be someone you've never met, never even talked to except through the medium of the......
By mick arran (0 comments)
Setting Priorities
Two of the people with the most on-the-ground experience in dealing with white christian nationalists in the United States -- Devin Burghart and Eric Ward (both currently with Center for New Community's Building Democracy......
By Jay Taber (0 comments)
Christianity was Hijacked
Kevin Annett's documentary film Unrepentant tells the story of the Canadian holocaust. For those unfamiliar with the systematic mass murder of indigenous people in Canada by the United Church of Canada and the Canadian......
By Jay Taber (0 comments)
IMAGINE: Media as a Sanctuary for Dissent
"The media should be a sanctuary for dissent. It is our job to go to where the silence is."-Amy Goodman ......
By eileen fleming (0 comments)
Berlet, Clarkson and Maley on the Radio
The syndicated radio program Writer's Voice , which originates at WMUA, the radio station at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, recently featured Dispatches contributors Chip Berlet, Leo Maley, and me in an hour......
By Frederick Clarkson (0 comments)
Reconquering a Continent
When it comes to threatening behavior, mainstream media's cover-up of Governor Palin's violent friends is a much bigger story than her abuse of power. Of particular interest to Native Americans -- according to Dr.......
By Jay Taber (0 comments)
Power of Moral Sanction
With the question of how to effectively oppose the rise of fascism in the United States now in vogue, I thought it apropos to revisit this essay from 2002, The Power of Moral Sanction.......
By Jay Taber (0 comments)
Where's the Action?
It would seem the objective of action is at hand. Organizing for that step can take multiple forms, but one that is essential to any political success is generating a list of supporters and......
By Jay Taber (5 comments)
Dispatches from the Religious Left -- on Grit TV
Following the dramatic launch event for Dispatches from the Religious Left: The Future of Faith and Politics in America, held at Middle Collegiate Church in NYC, Laura Flanders invited several of us to appear......
By Frederick Clarkson (1 comment)
Remembering Iran-Contra
For those too young to have watched the live TV coverage of the Iran-Contra scandal, the notion of murderous felonies being coordinated out of the White House basement might seem fanciful. With the new......
By Jay Taber (1 comment)
The Problem With Militias
Sarah Palin supports the militia movement? Public Good Project's Paul de Armond explains why that's a problem. ......
By Jay Taber (0 comments)
Assemblies of God, Palin, and me
I spent eight years of my life as a Pentecostal in the Assembly of God. It's as odd and alien a sect to most people as Mitt Romney's Mormonism. ......
By whaleman42 (2 comments)
Dispatches from the Religious Left -- Now Available!
At least it is now "in stock" over at Amazon.com. It should also be widely available in independent bookstores and chain stores as well.  I will not clutter this site with too much news......
By Frederick Clarkson (0 comments)
Transcript for Mary Glazier Video
Transcript of Audio "Opening the Gate of Heaven on Earth: Receiving the New Prophetic Wind for Increase" Conference, June 12 - 14, Everett, Washington Description of Conference at: <a href="http://freshpublishing.com/global-harvest-ministries-c-192-p-1-pr-33372.html ">http://freshpublishing.com/global-harvest-ministries-c-192-p-1-pr-33372.html Mary Glazier Alaska......
By Ruth (0 comments)
"Seven Mountains" and the "Joel's Army" plan for takeover
In yesterday's post, I went into some of the initial detail on a statement given by Thomas Muthee in the infamous sermon where he "annointed" Sarah Palin and also claimed to literally run a......
By dogemperor (0 comments)
Christian Fascism
[also see: Brent Bozell's Newbusters Insults Christian Conservatives - editor] Sarah Palin's propulsion into politics was fueled by religious intolerance, organized through malicious harassment, and targeted at democracy. Her use of the power of......
By Jay Taber (0 comments)
Politics of Thuggery
Much as most Americans prefer politics as entertainment, or at most as an informal seminar, the reality is that the politics of thuggery -- especially as practiced by the GOP -- is anything but......
By Jay Taber (0 comments)
Thomas Muthee's "Seven Mountains" and coded messages
Today's diary is--and yes, I know, this is a shocker--NOT going to be about Sarah Palin.  At least, not directly.  This is more towards some of her supporters...and especially in light of Palin throwing......
By dogemperor (2 comments)
New Model for Change
With American society in free fall, some activists are now reviewing the effectiveness of political organizing models they've used in the past. We suggest they include in their discussions two of our reports on......
By Jay Taber (0 comments)
Promoting Murder in America
Contrary to public opinion, promoting murder is not protected by the Constitution. Nor is it protected by tax exempt status, as in the case of charitable trusts and organized religions. The only place we......
By Jay Taber (0 comments)
War of Ideas
<h2> Attacking the Truth</h2> Robert Parry talks about the role of right-wing US foundations in funding the attack on truth in media. ......
By Jay Taber (0 comments)

More Diaries...