David French on Christian Nationalism and the New Right: The 2023 Barnes Symposium
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 ก.ย. 2024
- New York Times Columnist David French spoke at the University of South Carolina Thursday, April 20, at 7 p.m., in the Johnson Auditorium.
He joined Jennifer Frey, associate professor of philosophy, for a conversation on Christian nationalism and the new right for the 2023 Barnes Symposium.
The Rudolph C. Barnes Sr. Symposium sponsors talks about the intersection of law, religion and morality.
I was an independent until 2020. My perspective on the two parties differs greatly from David's. Reagan ushered the theocratic right into the mainstream of the Republican party. They didn't want religious freedom. They wanted US law to enforce religious views, rather than laws being about protecting individual rights. A zygote isn't an individual. The woman carrying those cells *is* an individual.
My leanings have remained toward supporting individual rights, separation of church and state, civil liberties, reason, science, justice, etc. The Democratic party was perhaps weak on those things. But the Republican party was flat out against them. I had no love for the Democratic party. My opposition to the Republican party was strong, and it had zero to do with feeling being part of the democratic party. It was simple. Which party opposed separation of church and state? Which party was deeply embedded in anti-science? Anti-academia? Anti-intellectualism? Anti-reason? And then with regard to fascism and white nationalism, which party did those who were in those directions feel at home within? Dominionists and Reconstructionists... which party did they find home within? It's all about what that party represents.
Where did evangelicals, up until the mid 70's, fall on the matter of women having the right to bodily autonomy? The majority were pro-choice. Even the head of the Southern Baptist Convention. It wasn't until around the late 70's that the polar shift started. And the abortion issue has little to do with abortion, and more to do with getting a foot in the door to establishing religion based law, and drive out the concept of individual rights. Appointing theocracy-friendly justices to the federal courts started, it seems to me, with the Reagan Administration.
32% of Americans believe religious views should dictate our laws, in opposition to the Constitution's separation of church and state. Which party do they gravitate toward. That percentage of theocrats isn't found in other advanced western nations. The US stands unique there.
The idea that those who oppose theocracy therefore support socialism and communism is flat out false. It's a right wing lie going back decades before Trump. Which democrats support switching to a planned economy and abolishing the existence of property rights? I don't know any. That isn't something the Democratic party supports. But which party supports theocracy, fascism, and white nationalism? That's the party that actually supports authoritarianism. And this why I've voted Democratic for decades. A flawed party. But at least not a party of authoritarianism. Unlike the Republican party.
Individual rights isn't that difficult a concept. One who is in office should support the Enlightenment ideas that underlie individual rights, not try to write their religious views into law.
The Soviet Union didn't have separation of church and state. If the state controls religion (or religion controls state), there is no separation of church and state. What distinguished us was individual rights vs authoritarianism. Our theocratic right in no way supports individual rights.
I have no problem with Christianity. Or religion. But I have major issue with theocracy. Anti-theocracy is *NOT* anti-christian. Or anti-religion. Despite the lies to the contrary.
The majority of Americans are Christian. The majority of Christians aren't theocrats. But that enormous minority that is very much gravitate toward the Republican party. Those who aren't more often gravitate toward the Democratic party. In no way does the theocratic right, or the Republican party, own Christianity. Though so many right wingers falsely claim they do, implicitly.
Now it seems that some pretend everything was good, from Reagan to Trump, and then suddenly all went wrong. It was Reagan who brought the theocratic right (not Christians) into the mainstream of the Republican party. Efforts to pack the federal courts with theocrats started decades before Trump. And again the issue isn't the religious, or Christians. The issue is theocrats, and their need to elevate religious views to rule of law.
I could criticize the Sanders left at length. And i so often have. But where the threat to the future of freedom rests is with the Republican party. And that started decades before Trump.
I'm not a centrist. And I'm not a leftist. I stand for individual rights, freedom, separation of church and state, civil liberties, reason, science, justice, decency, etc. And as such I oppose all forms of authoritarianism, be it theocracy, fascism, socialism, communism, white nationalism, or any other. And oppose bigotry, hate, anti-science, conspiracy theories, injustice, etc. So, the Republican party represents the opposite of what I support. The Democratic party may not qualify as the defenders of that list, but at least the party doesn't represent the opposite of those things.
You’re a fvcking liberal. Own it, it’s fine. Now David gets the New Right wrong, as it stands a lot of what you believe is antithetical to ours. There’s no reason why we should call each other countrymen. So prepare to fight, cause we are
Have you read Political Pistachio or listened to Douglas V.Gibbs on Constitution radio KMET 14.90?
No. Much of my political and economic learning were in the 80's. I watched the rise of the theocratic right, as Reagan ushered them into the mainstream of the Republican party. Studied a bit about history. Read Locke's two treatises, and the Federalist Papers. And so so so much more. As a citizen who wanted to be an informed citizen. I've spent about fifteen years writing on politics. And I've seen some of my phrasing and thoughts appear in the writing of others. Which is great. There are things that more are acknowledging. And so I've mostly dropped out of political discourse. Except for throwing in a comment here or there. Hopefully more Americans learn about Roger Williams, and what he kicked off, in the direction of separating church and state, back in the first half of the 1600's. He's the one that started the phrase wall of separation (and hedge of separation). He had much influence on John Locke (over in England). Basically learn about all of the liberal minds that led to a Constitution that separated church and state. Freedom isn't possible without that separation.
Also if more would learn about that 800 year period we call the dark ages. The tens of thousands who were burned to death, for supposedly being witches or sorcerers, as we climbed out of the dark ages, and into the Renaissance.
The more I learned about freedom, individual rights, separation of church and state, civil liberties, etc, the more I opposed the Republican party.
Until the mid 70's, most evangelicals were pro-choice. Even Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, the Southern Baptist Convention, and so many others. In '76, a whole lot of evangelicals voted for Carter. But by 80, as the evangelicals switched to anti-choice, and the theocratic right was on the ascent, the majority then voted for Reagan. Who elevated the theocratic right to mainstream within the Republican party. Watched the handling of the aids epidemic, in his placating the theocratic right.
There's so much that more citizens need to be aware of.
This country was founded on Protestant religious freedom. Not freedom of any religion.
well said
Good afternoon from the sunny SF Bay Area, July 14. You and I are opposed on so many issues it is not worth counting. But contrary to the often demonizing by the Christian Radical Right of people like me I actually agreed with many of your points. I was raised in an Evangelical family including my father a Presbyterian minister; my grandfather, great grandfather, and aunts and uncles who were either preachers and/or missionaries in the Free Methodist sect or Dutch Christian Reform Church. Catholics were considered statue worshipping pagans who were to be avoided. I learned early that Christianity was not for me but, in traditional Christian language, I was "called" to follow the more difficult path of finding God on his own terms. As someone once said your God is too small. I felt "called" to find the larger God, the Creator of the vast and glorious universe, not the biased God of man made religions. You are right on about character and virtue. It brought me great pleasure to hear you call out the so-called Christians on this devolution they have embarked on. Christians have done more damage to their causes by their horrible actions, people are fleeing churches because of it. Jesus has been terribly victimized by their actions and he is left to be the butt of nasty jokes or simply a profanity. There are many of us who have high values and a trust in the spiritual world, we use different language, we do not share in the violence, meanness, and cruelty associated with this Radical Right anti democratic agenda. I have been trying my best to get a handle on what has happened, I have many Trumpers in my extended family who believe God sent him. Each time I find a new sane voice I am quite happy to listen and share with my friends. We have all suffered under this dark cloud that has descended over our country going back to the Civil War, it never really went away. This era will be remembered historically as the Second Civil War, a time when all of the hens have come home to roost. We all pray this does not end in terrible violence, which actually happens every day in our streets and towns. When personal belief becomes a sledge hammer of political force there is suffering. You are free to believe as you will, to trust in God as you will, but you do not have the right to impose it on me. We are not a White Christian nation to be run by men. Religion and understanding evolve and will, if we let them, bloom into a righteous, loving, new and greater understanding of our place in the universe created by God for all his creations where ever they are, in what ever world he has placed them. I don't know if you will ever see this, I hope you do. I know it is a cliche but we really are all in this together, the one Family of God. Thanks for an interesting and enlightening conversation. PS Do you want to really know what "wokeness" is? Read the Beatitudes, or more simply The Golden Rule. It merely means to do for others as you would have done for you. That's it. But who cares what Jesus had to say.
I care. Thanks for your comments. I'm right there with you.
You aren't serious about dialogue and tolerance. Your diatribe proves that.
@@Jon.Morimoto That's quite a judgement. And a misjudgement at that. I would argue that what I said was not a "diatribe" but a statement of my experience and viewpoint. Who is intolerant and not serious? Be well.
@@chappellroseholt5740 The excessive length, harsh language, and evidence-free claims support the use of diatribe.
OK, I'll play along with your game. Here are some questions for dialogue:
1. You label millions of people as Christian Radical Right. Have you ever labelled people Atheist Radical Left? If so, name some people you consider Atheist Radical Left.
2. You rail against "violence, meanness,and cruelty." Please provide examples of those in USA political institutions. Whenever I watch Congress on CSPAN, I see elected officials disagreeing using peaceful words.
3. You describe your personal belief in "God the Creator of the vast and glorious universe" as opposed to " man made religions." Isn't your own belief a woman made religion? If not, please explain how no human invented it.
4. You label Trump supporters as "Trumpers." Do you not see the bias in the word choice? Do supporters of reproductive choice appreciate it when opponents label them "babykillers?" Note that this video was from an academic setting, and used restrained and tolerant language.
5. Woke as Christianity. So you would support the institutional racism against my family that was recently rejected by the Supreme Court? How much would you make me pay in reparations? Why should I pay a cent to people who were never slaves? I assure you that I've never owned a slave! Also, identifying woke with religious values conflicts with your principle that in religion "you do not have the right to impose it on me." Woke racial discrimination in education is an imposition on me.
6. Can people exercise self-control of their sexual behavior? Rape is a crime because we believe it is a deviant choice that should be punished. So why are other sexual deviant acts not only decriminalized, but a matter of pride? Why shouldn't morally-minded people demand higher standards from society, as long as all laws are passed in a democratic process?
Apologies for my lengthy reply, but most "progressives" and "liberals" exist in a bubble of their tribe. I look forward to discussing these and other topics if you are open to dialogue.
@@Jon.Morimoto Dear Mr. Morimoto, I think I will simply agree to disagree. I don't know you, you don't know me. I only wish you well on your journey. God bless.
Where does religious liberty mean our government laws should be according to the bible.. that's another thing Christians seem to get confused about.
Yes its actually a damn shame its not based more on the Bible … all debts are cancelled after 7 years in that book. Deut 15-17. An even better law is the one where your tithes/tax is only 10% … Hebrews 7:1-28. Don’t let them lie to you, its based on the beliefs of the RICH aristocracy who started this country, then brought peasants, servants, convicts and slaves to build it while they sat in their Big Plantation Homes. They used their religion which teaches OBEY the authorities (which they added to the book) against them.
Misleading title and a waste of time to listen to. A quick summary: “Clinton was a bad guy”, conservatives are good, republicans have good values and Reagan was the best. Also, cherry picking from history to preach to a choir of like minded “conservatives”.
Thank you David. I follow you and always appreciate what you have to say. You are a wise man and a wise Christian. I wish there were more minds likes yours.
@patrickmccurdy8688
Did you hear about David's good friend Joel Searby? He's facing jail time for attempting to meet a 15 year old boy online. If you recall, he ran Evan McMullin's campaign. The Trump Curse takes another scalp.
Please, Christians, go back to having a 'personal relationship with Jesus'.
Keep it in your churches.
Stop calling people, who don't want your religion, your enemies. You can't say people have worth then tell them they are broken and fallen.
You want to be a 'filthy rag', please yourself.
The only way that works is if the government allows freedom of dis/association.
Christiand arent doing that
why post such nonsense?
Secularists please go back to keeping it in your homes?
@@driatrogenesisIt's the ONLY thing that Christians do
Keep it in your church. Yeah because that’s what any religion does or should do. Stupid comment and thinking.
This is mislabeled -- this is a discussion of apologetics and conservatism not Christian Nationalism and the New Right.
A wonderful talk and discussion 👏
I'm on the side of those who know what a woman is. Anyone who knows what a woman is, and confesses their knowledge before God and men (see what I did there), is my friend and ally. Anyone who denies knowing what a woman is, they are not my friend, as it were, so to speak, if you know what I'm getting at.
A woman. Interesting line you've drawn for .
@@alicedavi1747 Got to draw the line somewhere, and the woman thing is as easy as it gets. There is no way that the sick twisted freaks can get away with pretending they don't know what a woman is. It's about as gas lighty as gas lighting could possibly ever get.
Nice try, though, do spin again.
How can I join the Christian Nationalist movement? Does anybody here know?
It is not a wholly organized group with a hierarchy and centers of meetings, it's an ideology who a lot of evangelicals on the right have subscribed to. See MTG, et-al promoting it.
It is not a new ideology either. It has its roots in pre WW2 where there was a strong Nazi bloc in the US formed in an attempt by Hitler to keep the U.S. out of the war whose motto was "America First". It was led by the radio priest Father Charles Coughlin, and the highly public German American Bund organization. It is pretty tied to nazism and white supremacy.
We’re recruiting brother. Great to have you on board
@caonexpeguero9984
Did you hear about David's good friend Joel Searby? He ran Evan McMullin's campaign in 2016. Joel got arrested for attempting to pickup a 15 year old boy online. The Trump Curse takes another scalp.
I recommend the books 'The Beloved Community' by Charles Marsh and 'Elusive Grace' by Rev. Dr. Scott Black Johnston.
At around 42:30, he explained something I have been wondering about for so long of why good people who are Republicans support Donald Trump. Especially when he gets to the point about embracing what one used to denounce. When he talks about when someone is in a group, each person has to believe that they are doing good. Donald Trump turned me into a Democrat.
Didn't turn me into a democrat, but may as well have. So long as christians support fascism I'll be voting for the opposition. If that's dems, so be it.
@@that_hereticFighting right, to coin a phrase, because Democracy keeps the world in balance so long as both parties do their best for all its citizens which is our influencer against totalitarianism ❤
oh no the sound is off
good. this pos is delusional
40:07 your high minded view of winning and losing is completely removing the consequences of either. Not loosing in a war is exponentially better than losing that war. For sure on an individual level. We’re not playing pickup basketball.
I keep hearing a ZZTop song……
I cant imagine why? 😳😄💃🏻
Isn't Christian Nationalism an oxymoron?
Religion is nationalistic, so no, in my opinion.
@@scottdavis3571 Isn't Christianity very specifically internationalist?
The old testament was very specifically nationalistic. Tribal even. But the NT rejects that entire premise and shift to ideology being the binding force instead of nation. No?
@@that_heretic Yes. They seek to both nationalize and internationalize. The Abrahamic religions (Islam & Christianity) are the examples for this. Hinduism doesn't seek international recognition as far as I know. Judaism isn't either, actually. They are tribal (nationalist) though. That's why Palestine is having a real problem with the Zionism. I don't know on the last part about the NT.
@@that_heretic We are going through a Christian Nationalism at the moment. They seek to make America great again by making it religious. Of course the problem is what's pure. You know it's going to come up.
Audio is so low couldn't watch
The MC has low volume but once the interview started, it was at a good volume on my device
54:15 I’d say that’s projecting. As far as who I’ve talked with and listened to it’s the other way around. The state of America is directly rated to the state of the church.
This is the best thing I have heard in a long time. I'm going to listen to this again and again.
yeah and become more and more brainwashed
@@driatrogenesisTo you, thinking for yourself is a "cult".
@@Justwantahover The problem is most people dont think, they just copy and repeat eachother!
@erichodge567, that’s how you indoctrinate yourself well.
David Frenchism isn't the result of" plenty and privilege without realizing where it came from" it's recognizing that we don't live in a unique time. Segregationist didn't "play by the rules". If you drop your principles because things aren't going your way then they aren't actually principles. Acting like you are in the heat of battle will ultimately destroy everything you want. Trump has irreparable damaged the conservative ideal for a generation.
What do conservatives want
Hear, hear! I’m encouraged by your comment. [deep breath] ❤
Nailed it. Thanks.
@@voskoff7A fantasy sold to them by propagandists. Grifters who pander votes for electoral support (seeking power) or clicks (monetary gain). What they actually create is far from any philosophical conservatism, small government with fiscal responsibility. Instead its a reaction to fear mongering fanning the flames of cultural unrest.
@@Jack-eo5fn nailed what?
He disnt day anything
Just a joy to hear David French my heart is happy that there are still intelligent Christians out there. I wish my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ would as curious as he is in this talk.
“Would be”
@@aquilajedi I am blind a lot typing errors lol
@jeremyreagan9085
David's good friend Joel Searby has been arrested for attempting to pickup a 15 year old boy online. Searby was an anti-Trump "Christian Conservative" aghast at Trump's immorality. I guess pederasty doesn't count.
25:11 so name one good thing about either party? There is a reason it is all but unanimous that people state it’s choosing the leader of two evils. Neither party has been virtuous or for Christian values ( deeper than lip service) for a long time.
"Tell me, are these Christian Nationalists here in the room with us right now?"
I just love to listen to him- so darn smart and funny too- laughs easily. Learn a lot listening to him.
God, can you simp any harder for global capitalists?
This is wise beyond words. The paleolithic conservative of the John Birch Society, Goldwater, and George Wallace never went away. Reaganism and neoliberalism Friedman didn't answer their questions and desires. A lot of them became rich under the Reagan tax reductions and the ones that followed but that didn't scratch their particular conservative itch. For the white and some black Southerners and Southern religious types, there was a hate of modernity and Trump scratched that itch. For them ironically, their vision was like the lyric to the song STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN.
(PS The shadow side of the evangelicals and traditional catholics has always been there and well hidden even for us who call or called ourselves Christian. In mainstream denominations, we didn’t see it. For a former Methodist, watching the actions of Methodist president and vice president Bush & Cheney with the handling of Katrina caused me to walk away from the faith. My tradcath and christian co-workers were okay with the handling of it and blamed the people in New Orleans. That was the moment I realized I was not a christian. It was the moment I didn’t know what the christian meant and still don’t. If anything, it was anti-Jesus and anti-Christian philosophically. However, that was always there, i.e., think Torquemada, Ludwig Müller, Eric Rudolph, or R.J. Rushdoony.)
Just call it what it is: Paulism, the state religion of the Roman Empire.
@@numbersix8919 With ancestors who were Huguenots, I get that.
I'd rather have the John Birch society than a bunch of pedophile sodomite groomers and racist BLMer and Antifa fascists. 2023 liberalism is just corporate fascism.
It's sad and frightening that some evil, obviously non-Christian theatrical performers got you to abandon your true family in Christ Jesus. My friend, Satan infiltrated your church with man made religion and being embarrassed by the greed and lust for power/money of exploitative men you left the true simplicity of Jesus' church - love and repentance.
@@amyjoyce2301 amen
This is the worst thing I've listened to in a long time, this guy sees virtue in politics, but only for his side.
30:00 this would happen naturally with advance contraceptives. The numbers don’t matter when talking about ethics or theory. You’re a “christian”. You not seeing the moral wrong of it is damnable.
Volume was too quiet
David Frenchism is a tame and "nice" way of thinking that is very common among the boomer generation. They just are stuck in the old way of thinking that worked when everyone played by the rules.
Not very useful in the heat of battle these days but it is interesting to see how persistent it remains in some of the elderly. Maybe it comes from a life long enjoyment of plenty and privilege without realizing where it came from or what it took to get that in the first place.
Ha!!! David French was born in 1969, 5 years into the 15-year span that represents the generation after the "boomers". There was never a time in politics when "everyone played by the rules". And you are characterizing David French's ideas as naive and the result of senility? My guess is that intellectuals with the credentials of David French have insight into their background and the history of the times into which they were born. What is not "interesting to see" is the "persistent" tendency of the far-right on social media to attack ideas that are well-thought and well-developed, with a dismissive and snarky "OK Boomer", as if all "boomers" think alike and just the fact of not having been born between 1946 and 1964, lends credibility to whatever war cry is parroted. So, the "new way of thinking" is "just be loud", no need for facts, truth, or to make a coherent argument informed by the past? And then you accuse David French of neglecting his personal history and the history of his generation?...In other words, of not knowing enough?...not thinking about things deeply enough?...not being an intellectual?
This is from an article titled: "THE ROADS (NOT) TAKEN - Is There a Recipe for Democratic Success?" by Dalibor Rohac, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and formerly with the Cato Institute:
(www.the-american-interest.com/2020/09/10/is-there-a-recipe-for-democratic-success/)
"Yet ideas have consequences, including bad ones-and the idea that the coercive apparatus of the state should be deployed in pursuit of “the Highest Good” ranks among the more discredited in human history. At a basic level, it is irreconcilable with traditionally conservative tenets of prudence, aversion to large-scale social experiments, and preserving institutions that work. Nor is this a new debate on the political Right. In 1927, one of the gurus of classical liberalism, Ludwig von Mises, had this to say about those who wanted to infuse politics with a deeper sense of meaning and spirituality:
'Liberalism has often been reproached [that] it has had nothing to offer man’s deeper and nobler aspirations. But the critics who speak in this vein show only that they have a very imperfect and materialistic conception of these higher and nobler needs. Social policy, with the means that are at its disposal, can make men rich or poor, but it can never succeed in making them happy or in satisfying their inmost yearnings.' "
@@dant3175
I don't think it comes from wisdom.
It looks like it comes from a well placed system of denial the he and others can hide behind, while reaping the rewards of a highly stratified society.
If you feel more comfortable blaming things in reactionaries, that is your choice.
Damn, if you think David French is “elderly” at 54, how old are you? Civility and integrity are critical to human cohesiveness. If you think otherwise, that’s on you. You’re correct about today’s “heat of the battle” but that’s because you took Donald Trump’s bait. You’re his mark and he’s loving what he’s done to your brain.
@@Jack-eo5fn Well, once you realize that playing "nice" is fine but it doesn't help when you're fighting for your life so to speak. There's a time and a place for everything. Unfortunately in today's American politics "niceness* is worse than useless.
David Frenchs job is to make sure the right loses with dignity.
He is totally missing the effects of FOX NEWS and Rush Limbaugh in pushing the hate.
At 54:53, French criticises Christian nationalism on the grounds that it fuses far too closely one's religious, political, and national identities. I'd certainly agree, but this just seems to be a more extreme version of the kind of attitude reflected in the festooning of churches with American flags around the Fourth of July (something he also mentions). I think the latter, however benign one may consider it, clears ground for the former.*
*As an Australian Christian, the idea of planting Australian flags around our church at any time of the year seems very foreign indeed.
“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.” - President George Washington's Farewell Address (1796)
Washington attended Christian churches throughout his life.
@@lukewarme9121 That doesn't mean we should be a theocracy,
@@johnnywomack548
Did the Founders create a Theocracy? They didn’t want one sect of the Christian religion to control the government like in England. To this day they pray to God, in Congrees, by using Chaplains on both sides of Congress since the Founding. Look it up. You’ve been brainwashed by the Left and have had a very poor education.
It's a CULT.
@@Justwantahover
Yep, the Founding Fathers were Cult. No reason to belong in a county that’s founded by Cult members. China is a good option for non-cultists.
By traditional conservative standards, DF is a moderate liberal.
He is decidedly left of center.
@@jayt9608where is anything he said center left?
Is it left, to accept that people one disagrees with still have rights?
He is clearly conservative in his convictions.
@@heikopfister9739
1) David French, for all his "pro-life claims, has struggled to find any limit on abortion that he could accept because of the harm it could cause the mother or without a dramatic expansion in welfare for single mothers.
2) David French opposed any Christian celebrating the overturning of Roe v Wade last year and has since argued against state imposed limitations and bans. His concerns, while addressed to Conservatives, particularly Christians always carry the same arguments and assumptions of the pro-abortionists in their arguments for unfettered abortions.
3) David French never writes an article that would upset the New York Times or The Atlantic.
4) David French routinely accuses Christian critics of being Fundamentalists, legalists, and Pharisees. He never applies any such designations to the left, but rather finds opportunity to give them praise.
5) David French has spoken of his beliefs on homosexuality and transgenderism as evolving and changing.
6) He routinely associates with Phil Vischer and the 'Holy Post' podcasters, and has a highly congenial relationship with Russell Moore, who as head of the ERLC wanted to end all issues related to the "culture war", namely issues of sexuality and abortion, and focus on poverty, inequality, and climate change.
7) David French is a member of the "conservative" PCA, which has nearly 50% of its constituents believing in the acceptability of homosexuality and 40% supporting "gay marriage".
8) David French has not supported a truly conservative candidate for the GOP nomination since 2004 and George W. Bush, who was the best we could get at the time. However, in 2008, he supported John McCain, though he disliked Sarah Palin, and in 2012 he supported Mitt Romney. I can not remember his preference in 2016, but I do remember that it was not Ted Cruz or Donald Trump. And he stated that Christians could vote for Democratic politicians with no crisis of conscience because of Trump.
I have read and listened to David French and his political companions for quite some time, and he is left of center and evolving.
David French is a traditional AMERICAN conservative. The so-called paleocons are anti-American traitors who regret the American Revolution and hate the Constitution. David French is also an orthodox Christian. The paleocons are pagans who think Jesus was a cuck.
@@jayt9608 excuse me, but none of These points have to do with left vs right.
They have to do with how you value induvidual freedom vs pre-existing social norms.
It is not even clear if they have a defined place on the conservative vs progressive scale. You don't have to hold ob to social conservative convictions to bei fiscally or economically conservative.
DF is clearly and without any doubt a liberal.
But liberal doesn't mean left - no matter how often Fox uses the terms interchangeable.
The left/right difference is about the question who is to control the means of (capitalist) production.
Sexual and reproductive freedom is about the question if society should have a say and how much over the individual. It's about who should have the power to control individual decisions. That's a question about liberalism and individualism vs autocracy and collectivism.
Never forget, when the liberals win, the religious and social conservatives don't lose their rights to engage in the religious services they value, live heteronormative relationships and not having abortions.
They just lose their possibility to control everyone else to live up to their values - even if they don't share them.
If the social conservatives win, the other side does lose the right to marriage, reproductive self-determination, self-expression and so on.
That's not fair game. It's not when one side wins, the other loses equal amount.
David French is a such a tool .
So according to Jonah, ‘entropy’ means things going wrong and he wants centralized control? Sigh….🙄
Jonah is both not very bright, and extremely dangerous. He's the kind of guy that ended up a guard at certain German camps in WW2 if you catch my drift.
1:03:34 ok. So can you name a single time people rising up against any other person or group of people would be justified with you humble love and forgiveness only philosophy? Is there any time that it is justified to use any means at all to take power or liberty from oppression? If so. What are those lines. If there are no lines that may be crossed I think you are off base.
Rushdoony and Christian Reconstructionism (Wikipedia)
1:20:08 just because we defeated the Soviet Union does not mean we were in a good place. Geopolitically sure. But as a culture and society we never deviated from the debauchery of the 60’s. It has only progressed. So keeping with your proposed lack of action we will continue to drift that same direction. In the 60’s if you cut your son’s junk off you would have been most likely be in prison if not worse.
If ppl like that chic doesn't understand character not winning is what's vital for any leadership position she needs to study up.
There are older conservative thinkers with the resources to critique Nationalism and other elements of conservatism (Locke - who has shaped the terms of US politics; and Burke - less known in the US I think).
My biggest concern for this nation is how we are headed for authoritarianism by the white Christian nationalists. Whenever Christians explain things such as French does, they always assume that everyone believes in Jesus being a god and that the Bible is his inerrant word. I was a born-again Christian for 39 years and then I did the unthinkable--I decided to really study the Bible, its history and those who supposedly wrote it. I took online lecture courses from believing professors in major divinity schools, and after that and listening to both sides of the religion argument, I no longer believed in any inerrancy of any of the thousands of Bible manuscripts. Christian nationalism want to destroy democracy and replace it with autocracy and delusional people think they are doing the works of their deity just like people following Zeus or Dionysius did in the days of Rome. And though Nashville may be the hub of this nationalism, I live in a western state where white Christian nationalists are flocking and saying they will follow the golden rule, which, by the way, did not originate with Jesus but has been a concept of world religions way before Christianity. And this country was not founded on the Christian religion, so said Pres. Adams. And several of our Founding Fathers were not Christians.
He kinda skipped over the basis of Trump which was the Tea Party and as for Trump being smart..there is a significant difference between 'smart' and 'cunning'.
I can see 10 minutes into this that there will never be ONE word about capitalism.
Good luck folks, you're gonna need it.
Lol at "totally secular neo-paganism".
Christian Nationalism doctrines are unbiblical, and so are the related false teachings of Seven Mountains Mandate (7MM) and Dominionism. Regarding the Seven Mountains false teaching: This brings us to confusion because of the conflict with the book of Daniel. It means that Daniel 4:17 has to be fully extinguished (redacted) in order to bring the Seven Mountains into fulfillment. How can God be appointing ‘the basest of men’ to rule when the Church is appointing Christians at the same time? As for Dominionism: The rulership of Christ on earth is established when the 7th seal is broken and the 'kingdoms of the world become the Kingdoms of God and His Christ', as described in Revelation 11:15. This 7th Seal event must follow the order established in Revelation which says that with the opening of the 6th Seal, the Two Witnesses are released to eventually be killed, then resurrect in three days. Since this has not happened yet, the kingdoms of men are still that, regardless of how many top spots, as per 7MM, are taken up by Christians. Yes, He is the ruler in the kingdoms of men, but the huge step of the 'kingdoms of this world becoming the kingdoms of God and His Christ' is not going to happen until after the 6th seal of revelation is broken.
As a Catholic, I thought the "Djesus Uncrossed" parody was hilarious.
I didnt
You must be a fake catholic
Can’t hears you
Respected friends, let us approach politics not as a mere sport or a trivial feud, but rather as an intricate dance, a grand symphony of ideas and ideals. It's in this choreographed exchange that we shape the form and future of our society.
Our American fabric could be likened to the frontal lobes of the human mind - the seat of judgment, empathy, and reasoning. The role of our government in this context is to act as a conduit, a corpus callosum harmonizing between diverse perspectives and creating a consensus that responds to our dynamically evolving world.
However, we now live in a world that functions as an intricate mega-system, and yet, there are times when we find ourselves thinking within the confines of a smaller, simpler system. A system that places wealth creation as the central objective. Yet the mega-system requires a call for us to elevate our thought processes and to broaden our perspectives or face the risk of obsolescence. There are other more important values than mere wealth.
The recent Actor's strike brings this dilemma into sharper focus. Concepts of work and property, embodied in the Opus Dei ideal of holy labor, are being upended by technology and automation. The rise of robots has initiated a significant shift, prompting us to question the role of humanity in an era of digital supremacy.
This brings us to a critical point regarding the perception of Christian Nationalism towards AI. I suspect that they will view an AI, inclusive of all perspectives, as a threat to their belief system and will propose an AI confined within their particular interpretation of language and meaning. Their apprehension requires that they defend their ideology amidst the boundless expansion of knowledge and comprehension that AI potentially offers.
We must remember that we're not navigating a binary choice between past and future, old and new. People connected to traditional religious and cultural systems aren't just leftover pieces in a puzzle. They are an integral part of our shared history and have value and purpose within the grand scheme of things - a truth acknowledged by the Great Spirit that encompasses us all.
As we face these challenges, let us embrace them with grace, understanding, and a commitment to dialogue. Let's acknowledge the intrinsic worth of each individual and respect diverse perspectives, thus creating a future that blends the wisdom of our past with the promise of tomorrow. Ray Evans Harrell, artistic director, The Magic Circle Opera Repertory Ensemble Inc, NYCity and graduate the University of Tulsa School of Music 1959-64
Oh no, I must disagree. Americans need to, nay, must keep, politics at arms length. It is a sport and should be treated that way. It in fact turns its own self into a trivial feud, and the problem is that we've all begun to take it just a bit too seriously. I believe USA Americans need to treat politics, in particular presidential elections, like a shopping trip. We need to be extremely wary of impulse-buys, and we need to shop like we've got a budget, a plan and the power to execute that plan. We need to be completely unbeholden to partisan ideology, (even though we all inevitable lean), and vote by a combination of logic based on best-knowledge-available at the time, and gut instinct. We pay politicians to "get serious" about what they're trying to sell us ... let them continue to do that and in the meantime, let voters cast their vote for whomever they feel is the best person for themselves, not for groups, or "others". There is a lot of merit in American-realized individualism.
5:40
This is a basket of disconnected ideas. Kind of weird thinking.
Not good content for Trump cultists, is it.
This is oyr orginal founding principles this majority voter never left it was subverted trump step into a known void .its been discrematly suppressed but internet now can't censor majority .the way it was in 1900s
60 year march into global socialism was disconnected Rino/ dino thinking. Top down rule more left wing prussian school reforms recruiting fpr state sponsored corpretism . Oppisite our foundjng rights reserved for private sector individualism cornered messaging.
Dead speak corps has stolen this away. This is born out of god given free will thought and religious freedom.
Everyone worships something if they know it or not.
I was good with watching this till David said he wasn't sure which candidate was actually going to be worse between Hillary or Trump. You lost me there as you would have to be completely detached from reality for that to have been true.
He must think the pro-abortion Catholic Joe Biden is a Saint.
He's only against Trump because of his personna, not because of policy.
Cognitive dissonance much?
@@christopherhamilton3621 Speak for yourself much!
Please, this guy is huffing his own psuedo intellectual nonsense
@@driatrogenesis Glad to see some people see through this. Just because you're anti-Trump doesn't make one a good or even intelligent person.
I am not sure that the goals of social conservatives are compatible with the principles of limited government. To my eyes social conservatives are trying to use the power of government to create a world that reflects their values even if their fellow Americans disagree. Not all of us want to return to a mythical nirvana of 1950’s America. For all of the excesses of progressives, I fear the excesses of social conservatives far more - especially their penchant for authoritarianism and cultural conformity. The new right combines all of the most unattractive qualities of the old right with few of the redeeming qualities.
🎉 Thank you!
Progressivism is pure, unadulterated authoritarianism.
Lol, so you'd rather have the progressives ramming their ideology down everyone's throats and lopping off kids body parts because they are confused about gender?
The fact is the new left is nothing more than a mass of zombified faux-intellectuals using Marxist conflict theory to drive a wedge between groups based on immutable characteristics like race and gender. Hardly progressive and in fact very sexist and racist to anyone still capable of thinking critically.
@Slovakia, are the goals of social liberalism in the current format compatible with the terms of limited government?
@@robertclark2240 Not all of them no. The main thing I fear from the policies of social liberals is economic inefficiency and loss of economic freedom. They may also have unrealistic ideas about policing / national security. But at this point in time the greatest threat to the US republic comes from authoritarian forces on the right enabled by the votes of social conservatives that are willing to enable illiberal undemocratic forces as a means of pursuing their social policy goals. Trump would do to the USA what Hugo Chavez has done to Venezuela.
Don't say "Christian nationalists" - say "ChristiaNazis (1 word). Pronounced "kris chuh nat sees”
I had the same conversation with my 10 year old sibling. Idk why this woman wants to act like what he’s saying is important or clever.
The bible is an anthropocentric work that has been superseded by academic revelation, which continues to increase in clarity & comprehensivity. Why David you appear to blame contemporary mankind for religions ineptitude, puzzles me.
For me, humanity is mid speciation & religion will only survive if it incorporates the light now accessible to humanity.
Universal Humanism is the true path.
I thank God that the First Amendment prevents your novel religion from ever becoming established as official in the US.
Humanism is in America. Yes I agree this not quite the Universal Humanism I am proposing.
note:- God & the universe are interchangeable terms.
It will though allow parents to continue the benefits of a deity.
Agreed; in fact I’m going to quote Micah myself in future as a humanist.
Interesting, I was not aware of Micah. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micah_(prophet)
@@i.m.gurney The verse quoted by French, Micah 6:8, is the only verse anyone remembers from Micah:
He has told you, O mortal, what is good;
and what does the Lord require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness,
and to walk humbly with your God?
David, how do I “Love my enemies”?
Isn’t the most loving thing I can do to call them to repentance and name their sin?
Are you serious? Why don't you try focusing on the plank in your eye. Name your own sin and fix that...
Pride in your sins is the new cool thing.
Jesus addressed your question in Luke 10:25-37, the Parable of the Good Samaritan.
It depends on how it is done. Loving includes the means - not only speaking the truth but doing it in love.
Remember, Hillary's Gender?
David French. Not going to spend my time watching but he sure does say some Crazy stuff on twitter....
The nation was ready for someone like Trump. Thank God evangelical conservative right wing Christians sought holiness and righteousness through our Lord Jesus Christ to follow His will by protecting and anointing a malignant narcissist apostle.
Ywn
do you have any commwnts that are based in truth or just slander and hatred?
@@driatrogenesis Sarcasm was heavy in my comment. I watched and witnessed as “conservative” Christian republicans jumped in bed with Trump almost immediately. I was raised in these systems and institutions and was shocked how many of them sold out and are still on the Trump train.
What specifically are you referring to as slander and hatred?
@@DrPhilGoode Slander of Christians and of Jesus Christ,
You are full of vile hatred and delusion
The only historical figure I could of in this regard is Phylis Schlafy.
😂 Good one!!! French was on the money…
This guy is unbearable. He makes no real attempt to understand the politics he’s opposed to. This is not intellectually serious.
French understands his opponents better than they understand themselves. Trumpism lacks any intellectual underpinning - and most of its adherents are proud of that fact.
Which "politics" is he opposed to?
@@arimathean4128 rypical braindead response
I do not think you listened carefully. Listen again. You have misunderstood this man. Be more careful.
@@lydiadugan8368 You have no idea who is running this operations.
Its all a game, we live in the matrix, its all a show!
Get it through your head!
This whole show is designed to bring you under their control, to make you as degenerate as them, and thus unable to resist. All the hatred they bring about in people, by pitting one against another using these stories and characters they control...its all destruction of your true will power.
Stop falling for the same tricks over and over.
If humanity really wanted change, they wouldnt continue doing the same things over and over again, like trusting a govt that was sold out long long ago.
You are a subject, which means you dont have free will, you are subjected, you are not sovereign, you the possessed, you are the beneficiary of the benefactor...you have no rights under Maritime rule
left right up down in and out, just as meaningless
UCLA has much better lecturers with more intellectual depth on these subjects. South Carolina has always struggled with decency. Very backwards culture and university.
Sorry, abortion is a big issue!
So big it has no business in politics.
It’s debatable if david french has any intelligence left. He certainly is a standard bearer of the old right. Too cowardly to actually stand up for what’s right, unless you consider wordy think pieces “standing up” for christianity, or even just real conservatism.
Really? David French literally devoted his life to defending religious liberty in the courts and has done far more to actually influence the course of events than dozens of talking heads who say "bold" things but accomplish nothing. What gives you the right to judge his motives? Do you have any response to his arguments? People like you are the surest indicator that he is onto something.
@@michaelhochstetler2049 i don’t know, what gives him the right to low key mock and question everything he doesn’t agree with just because he’s stood up for a few things here or there? He’s soft peddled the trans movement, he’s thrown tons of conservatives under the bus or not supported them over the last few years just because they arent “winsome” enough. What gives him that right? So when we need him to take a hard stand the most, he and guys like you just point to what he’a done in the past, but don’t really donthat much to change the course we’re down now. So, what right do i have?? At least the right of a person in the pews who’s seen terrible ideas take root because of the support, or at very least inaction of people like french, keller, Russell moore, and many more. Ideas like placating homosexuality for the sake of a pluralistic society (your boy french being one of those), trying to find a middle ground with transgender movement. Your argument isn’t that convincing, to be honest.
@@michaelhochstetler2049 the only thing he currently realizes is that there is great dissension between people. That’s obvious, but he fails to grasp the whole picture of why we’re where we’re at because he lives in academia and has not gone any deeper, despite his long winded talking and pontificating, on why many, many conservatives are so fed up. So no, he’s really not onto much of anything consequential, or different than what his elite academic pals have already come up with
@@michaelhochstetler2049 also, im not judging his heart, just his reasoning, words and deeds that he has clearly articulated. And i could only take about 50 minutes. He’s so laughably out of touch with the state of the situation he’s in
@@michaelhochstetler2049 How does one literally vs figuratively devote one's life? French slandered the right here and has a proven record of punching right. People are very complex and we see what they really value when persecution comes, maybe.
I heard a lot semantic bereft of any intellectual substance.
Examples?
@@jsharp3165 Lol spoken like a true bot
he just gave you the fact
there ia no substance
That’s exactly the difference between hearing and listening: what a self-own…😂
Trump hater
her legs....
Blaspheming Traitors is a more accurate description.
B.S. !! ! Don,t send your kid,s to College
1:03:34 ok. So can you name a single time people rising up against any other person or group of people would be justified with you humble love and forgiveness only philosophy? Is there any time that it is justified to use any means at all to take power or liberty from oppression? If so. What are those lines. If there are no lines that may be crossed I think you are off base.