Board index ‹ Government and Politics

[Kookle]

I believe that this may be on your mind, as it has on mine. Do you have any biblical or historical Christian reference material on how we as Christians can address this increasing specter of authoritarianism? Or perhaps good references on this topic?

I’ve read a little about Bonhoeffer and the struggles the church had in Germany. It seemed the church was divided then. And unfortunately I see some parallels with the current government.

[jimwalton]

As you know, the world of the Bible is the world of authoritarianism. They all lived in monarchies or empires, so every biblical reference we have from 1 Samuel on is in a context of authoritarianism. In the Bible, God doesn’t dictate the shape of society. He does not seek to form a "perfect” society, because no society is perfect (since it is a society of fallen humans). He rather speaks into the shape of society as it exists in those times and encourages his people to live holy lives in that society. He does not dictate an ideal kind of government (monarchy vs. democracy, authoritarian or citizen-led); he does not dictate a system of marriage (arranged vs. love) or even polygamy vs. monogamy; he does not dictate the way that a society is stratified (slaves and free); he does not dictate a certain sort of economy (market economy vs. barter). Every social structure is flawed.

In the Youtube I recorded last week, we can see in the Bible a range of responses to government, ranging from turn the other cheek (Jesus and Paul) to rejection (Isa. 1.10-17), and ultimately rebellion (just war theory). Daniel and his 3 friends all stood up to the gov’t, but none of them rose up against it (they had no means of doing that). Sometimes Paul just submitted (Romans 13.1, and numerous examples from Acts), and at other times he pressed for his rights (numerous examples from Acts). John the Baptist spoke harshly against Herod’s immorality (not his authoritarianism), and was executed. Moses, of course, stood up against Pharaoh, not to overthrow the gov’t or as a coup, but he did defy Pharaoh.

I’m not aware of a biblical instance of a stand against authoritarianism. It was an unavoidable part of their world, perpetually, and they rolled with it.

The political books I have are in the context of democratic capitalism and our relationship to the government from that vantage point. I have books by Senator Mark Hatfield, Chuck Colson, John Yoder (a Quaker), and Os Guinness (just war theory). But those don’t specifically address the issue of authoritarianism.

Obviously, as you mentioned, Dietrich Bonhoeffer was involved in a plot to assassinate Hitler and was executed for it. I have 3 books by Bonhoeffer, but he doesn’t touch on the subject in any of those. I don’t think Dostoyevsky addressed it, either.

So I don’t have any resources like that, and my familiarity with that kind of political literature is non-existent.

Possibly something about Bonhoeffer or by Solzhenitzen exists?

[Kookle]

Thank you Jim, that is very thought provoking.

I'm a bit torn on your conclusion however, given perhaps my cultural bias from growing up in the US. (In the course of human events... inalienable rights... anti tyranny and all that.) Perhaps I've convoluted tyranny and authoritarianism. I'll need to mull that over a bit more as I'm not a big fan of 1984 or brave new world scenarios, but I do want to have a clear biblical perspective on that. I'll look up some of your references.

It is however clear to me that oppression is not God's will and I tie that together with tyranny but perhaps that is just the outcome of authoritarianism in the wrong hands. Benevolent kingship and all that on the flipside.

[jimwalton]

Tyranny and authoritarianism are not totally synonymous. Any kind of situation—employment, parental, marriage, friendship, political—can be authoritarian. Tyranny is more specific to government, though other authorities (business office, education) can be tyrannical in nature. Obviously, we even use the term figuratively to speak of the clock’s tyranny or the tyranny of the urgent. Usually, I would say, the authoritarian exercises complete control, but tyranny connotes oppression. We respect God’s authority over us, but there’s nothing tyrannical about His sovereignty.

Fascism, on the other hand, is almost always political, exalting national power above any individual rights, is often characterized by some kind of racial prejudice, economic regimentation, restrictive social control, and attempts to suppress and silence opposition.

You can see the similarities of the terms, though they are not synonymous. Hitler was obviously fascist. So also, in my opinion, Stalin & Mao. They ruled with an iron fist, killing scholars and artists, Christians and opposers. I don’t see Trump as being in their league.

I know people accuse DJT of being fascist, but I don’t see it. People accuse him of racism, and that’s a judgment call. It’s not like George Wallace in 1968, for sure. They accuse him of being a nationalist, and that he is (rather than a globalist), but not in depriving citizens of individual rights; he seems to be strong on individual rights. I think he has freed up the economy more than his predecessors. I haven’t seen restrictive social control. But he’s pretty strong about trying to silence his critics, especially in marginalizing the press. So I don’t see him as fascist. He only has 2 of the 5 markers.

Tyrannical? Oppressive use to power to get his way? A case can be made here, though it’s still a judgment call. It’s nothing like Roman emperors, for instance. He pushes the limits of the Constitution and goes over them, but so does Pelosi. He asserts his authority as I’m not sure any previous president has ever done, and I think this is where he earns the label. Executive orders, moving money, etc.

I think back to Gerald Ford. I think he holds the record for Presidential vetos, even though he was in office for only a brief time. Using his power to get his way. But don’t they all do that? I just think Trump doesn’t have a smooth, diplomatic (“snake in the grass”) personality like other politicians, so he comes across as very rough, bold, brazen, and tyrannical. But I think we have had presidents in the past who were actually far worse (LBJ, for instance), but they were more polished and so didn’t ruffle feathers like DJT.

Authoritarian in our current situation? Certainly the peaceful protestors have a right to a voice and to assemble, and their voice should be heard. Some terrible things are happening. But shouldn’t the gov’t have a right to stop the anarchical looters and rioters who are just out there to destroy and steal? Should any governor, mayor, or president not be allowed to stop the disorder and destruction? Or is he just authoritarian if he tries to stop it? I guess I don’t get that. I think the protests are legal, I thing the looting and rioting should be stopped, and fast. And if it takes force, then use force. That’s just my opinion. These people are destroying the lives and businesses of honest, hard-working people. It’s not the protestors, but the crazies out there. Shouldn’t that be stopped?

[Kookle]

“I'm an expert on fascism and I know what Trump's actions during the George Floyd protests look like”

Professor Feldman of the University of York



https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/trump-fascism-george-floyd-protests-washington-dc-a9546941.html

[jimwalton]

And I will readily admit that I am not an expert on fascism, nor was I even a political science major. Thanks for linking the article for me.

[Kookle]

Hi Jim.

I read this and thought you may be interested given our recent conversation on the topic.


Can it happen here? Bill Moyers says it’s happening right before our very eyes

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/can-it-happen-here-bill-moyers-says-its-happening-right-before-our-very-eyes/

[jimwalton]

Yep, some things he said are obviously true, some are obviously caricatures that I think are inaccurate ("He has purged his own party of independent thinkers and turned it into a spineless, mindless cult”; "He has purloined religion for state and political ends”; "He has desecrated the most revered symbols of Christian faith by converting them to partisan brands.”).

In my opinion, EVERY politician manipulates and uses propaganda. They all focus on the economy, health care, and jobs. They appeal to a variety of concerns with promises that can be both attractive and contradictory. It’s the nature of politics. Politicians spin the facts, ply their power, the work to marginalize their opponents and detractors.

I’ll easily concede that Trump is narcissistic and power hunger. He doesn’t have a grasp on the truth at all. He’s always far too ready to pat himself on the back. He’s mostly a twit in the way he treats other people, and he’s awful about how he talks about them.

The writers says Trump “has declared himself above the law.” No he hasn’t, though sometimes he acts like it. I think Nancy Pelosi is worse than Trump in this regard (which doesn’t justify or exonerate DJT, by any means).

The writer complains that he has politicized the Department of Justice. I disagree. The dep't was politicized WAY before Trump got into office. And I don’t think he’s “remaking the judiciary in his image.” I’m actually glad he’s installing judges with a sense of morality and a view of the legitimacy of the Constitution.

"He has recruited religious zealots for jobs in his administration, rewarding with government favors the electoral loyalty of their followers.” Whaaaattt?

"He has relentlessly attacked mainstream media as purveyors of 'fake news’.” Um, I have a LOT of problems with mainstream media of all angles. The media have been atrocious. It’s astounding how so many are no longer about objective news reporting, but instead are all about editorials disguised as news.

"He has maneuvered the morally hollow founder of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, into compromising the integrity of the most powerful media giant in the country by infusing it with partisan bias.” What? Trump single-handedly "infused [Facebook] with partisan bias”? Facebook has never had integrity, and they were infused with bias long before Trump got into office.

And then he says Trump “has banned [truth] from his administration.” Ridiculous. For instance, I have a lot of respect for Bill Barr.

Trump has many many problems. His weaknesses are a tremendous detriment to the country and the world. But this article isn’t just about Trump and fascism. Many parts of it have nothing to do with his case about fascism, but only about doing his part to slam Trump and unload his beef against him.

I thinks some parts of the article are accurate and some are over the top and therefore wrong. Like all media, we are not getting the straight story. As usual these days, we have to sort through it ourselves and be discerning.