Comments Which Conservatives Block From Their Blogs For April 7, 2021

 April 6

To Bradley Birzer and his article on what Conservatism must to continue. This appeared in the Imaginative Conservative blog.

Where I see conservatism is that it is at the center of denial. That denial is a failure to recognize the system racism and the oppression of other groups and its own culpability in that oppression. And thus recognizing the dignity of individuals does little to address people's needs when their problems are not adequately recognized. In addition, conservatism is in denial of its own inadequacies and its need to learn from other ideologies.

But conservatism is not the only group in such denial. Liberalism and the Left are in the same kind of denial as conservatives are. There are circles from all of these ideologies that fail to recognize both their own weaknesses and failures as well as the contributions other ideologies can make. what distinguishes conservatism from the other ideological groups in their denial is that in America, conservatism is the most boisterous of all the ideologies.

Conservatism has become tribal and with that tribalism has come hubris and the assumption that conservatism had everything to teach and nothing to learn from other isms and ideologies. and thus all other approaches are seen as threats by conservatism. One only needs to listen to conservative talk media or conservative politicians or blog sites like this one to observe that hubris.

It would be unfair to not to mention the hubris that exists in liberal and leftist circles as well. And that hubris makes each group act as if collaboration with other ideological group as compromising, if not a betraying, one's principles. But again, those in conservatism seem to be the most boisterous of all ideological groups.

What we see to today on all sides is ideological tribalism where in each tribe outsiders are shunned if not demonized. Such tribalism is divisive. Such tribalism causes people to declare culture wars in a forever king-of-the-hill battle for survival.

So conservatism is basically not just following the path that other ideologies are pursuing, it is leading the way. And the only way for conservatism to change course is to emerge from its current state of denial and to escape tribalism. And to do that, conservatism has to admit that it doesn't have all the answers and that it could a few things from liberals and leftists.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Stephen Klugewicz and his article that criticizes MLB for moving its All-Star game from Atlanta in protest against Georgia’s new election laws. This appeared in the Imaginative Conservative blog.

The above article shows nothing but contempt for those whose views oppose what Klugewicz believes. Broad assumptions are made of anyone who is woke--those who see and oppose systemic racism or promote equality for those in the LGBT community.

Does Klugewicz know how MLB made the decision to oppose Georgia's voting laws? Does Klugewicz understand the issues surrounding Georgia's election laws? What could be the goal of changing election laws when Trump appointed officials supported the fairness of the 2020 election? Does Klugewicz comment on the fact that Trump injected a conditional suspicion into the elections when he claimed during both the 2016 and 2020 campaigns that he could only lose if the election was rigged?

Does Klugewicz see systemic racism in our nation or is such a notion itself an insult to what he values?

The whole above article is nothing more than an ad hominem attack on wokeness without making any distinctions. Everyone who is woke to any degree is considered to only be self-serving and uninformed by Klugewicz. And it is  that kind of overgeneralized thinking and labeling of people that wokeness says is a major problem with this nation. Basically, in protesting wokeness, Klugewicz demonstrates the kind of thinking that bigotry is made of.

Comments Which Conservatives Block From Their Blogs For September 2, 2020

Aug 5

To R. Scott Clark and his blogpost entitled Tribalism and Irony. IN the article, Clark takes issue with a critic of his article about Grace Community Church’s worship service while allegedly, by Clark, having not read the article. This appeared in Heidelblog.

The siren song of tribalism is particularly alluring to those who build high pedestals for their heroes and pet ideologies--realize that theology is a kind of ideology.

So noting your strong allegiance to conservative political ideology as well as reformed theology, I would be careful in citing others for tribalism. It all has to do with the height of the pedestals on which we place our heroes and favorite ideologies.

BTW, research has shown that there is no spike in coronavirus cases because of the protests since most of the protesters continue to wear masks. That makes the public gatherings of the protests a little too incomparable with the public gatherings of worship where masks are generally not worn.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aug 24

To R. Scott Clark and his blogpost warning about a new McCarthyism because of a new Princeton proposal to have a committee be in charge of investigating anti-Black racism by faculty as practiced in their behaviors, incidents, and research. This was posted in Heidelblog.
What is apparent both from past concerns and actions and present ones, is that some conservatives become on edge when prejudice and discrimination come under higher scrutiny. And that seems to say something about those particular conservatives and their ideology.  Here we should note that conservatism is not a monolith so this in now way is describing all conservatives.

What is also odd is this warning about the possibility of a McCarthyism employed by nonconservatives while the political party that most conservatives align themselves with has become much more authoritarian than during the last Presidential election. Trump is now the GOP. That is an ominous warning according to History.

In the past, the Tsars saw themselves as Russia and the Bolsheviks equated themselves with the Revolution. And we know about Hitler and which group he defined as the superior race. When a person or group is equated with a cause or nation, nonconformity is seen as opposition to a greater good and thus the enemy. And yet, Clark is concerned about a new McCarthyism from nonconservatives. The question for Clark is whether he believes that only conservatives can wield the sword of enforced conformity and authoritarianism correctly.

After all, calling for greater scrutiny of what could be considered racism in and of itself is not threatening. What makes it threatening is the authoritarian response to noncompliance emphasizes harsh punishment. So what makes Clark understandably on edge is not just the proposal, but the social context in which the proposal would operate.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aug 28

To R. Scott Clark and Carl Trueman for Clark’s blogpost that quotes and cites an article written by Trueman who asks whether we should add to what the Reformers wrote about the marks of the Church in the light of the sins that today’s wokeness is directing our attention today. This was posted in Heidelblog.

Trueman’s article can be found at:
    https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2020/08/woke-repentance

Granted that wokeness is selective in the sins it points out, but what group, including the Church, hasn't been? So who are Christians to point out that particular fault about wokeness without identifying wokeness as a peer in selectivity?

And why call wokeness hokey? Why call the awareness of social and corporate sins and the desire to doing something about them hokey? Is that because personal, individual sins are more evil? Are status quo sins less sinful than aberrant sexual sins? If wokeness is pointing out real sins, then shouldn't our response be that acknowledging where wokeness is correct and should be listened to rather than labeling it as if it had nothing worthwhile to say?

Trueman is correct in nothing how the Church has failed and that it needs to repent. But what wokeness is pointing to is that just perhaps we have more sins to repent of than we be knowledgeable of or able to repent of. And when realizing that, we gain a better, but not complete, understanding of God's mercy and grace and thus the graciousness with which we need to treat each other. And we might also learn that the Church, especially the traditions it so heavily relies on, is not the only source for learning about our sins.

And speaking of Church traditions, is it possible that conservative theologians, like both Clark and Trueman, are overly dependent on Reformed traditions to the extent that they use them as a canon to determine how we should both understand and respond to current problems?