Bill, that’s not fascism, this is fascism

Hat tip to AV and Sammy on this one.

Murray Adamthwaite, a medieval historian, writing on Bill Muehlenberg’s blog, gives us not-so-sage wisdom about President Elect Barack Obama.

“One only has to read the recent book by D. Freddoso, “The Case Against Barack Obama”, to see how he has come up through the ranks of the Chicago machine. A reformer he is not!
In his victory speech inter alia he promised “liberty for all”, in much the same way as did Hitler in 1933 when introducing draconian measures which restricted liberty.”

(Murray Adamthwaite, 2008)

Aside from the fact that David Freddoso’s book has already had falsehoods discovered in it (such as the $32500 lower-tax bound meme – sorry but the Washington Post link doesn’t work anymore), Adamthwaite is one of those sectarian Young Earth Creationists. Indeed, he was involved in Answers in Genesis, back before Ken Ham went and appropriated it, back in 2002 having a bit of a war with a prominent Presbyterian minister who didn’t buy into literal accounts of Noah’s flood.

If Adamthwaite knew anything about population genetics, he’d have added to his “Dispersion after the Flood” section, an “Extinction from genetic erosion after the Flood” section. He’s probably better off not saying anything, rather than put his foot in it and get it all wrong like Ken Ham (canids would not have diversified, more traits would have become fixed and extinction would have been the most likely outcome.)

Of course, Adamthwaite is a theologian that recognises special Providence. Which is to say, if he can’t explain it, Goddidit! An intellectually bankrupt escape hatch from empiricism.

I wonder what he attributes missing socks, keys and mobile phones to? Goddidit! Better pray for them next time he’s got an important meeting he doesn’t want to be late for.

You would expect any rational person to at least take Adamthwaite with a grain of salt. I mean, he can’t be wrong about absolutely everything he says, but c’mon.

Well, there is no direct addressing of Adamthwaite’s points (shunning?), but a Stephen White, esentially repeating Adamthwaite’s point, says;

“At a time of great financial crisis a nation turns to charismatic, eloquent unkown (sic) who preaches a better future for them as a country. USA 2008….Germany 1933….”

(Stephen White, 2008)

And this time, Bill responds…

“Thanks Stephen

I know my critics think I am far too cynical and over the top already, but I can’t help but thinking that you are clearly on to something here with your interesting observation.”

(Bill Muehlenberg, 2008)

Call me cynical and over the top, but isn’t Stephen’s appropriation of Adamthwaite’s logic a fallacy of the undistributed middle?

NAZIs promised liberty. Obama promised liberty. Therefore Obama is a NAZI.

NAZIs held eloquent speeches. Obama held eloquent speeches. Therefore Obama is a NAZI.

Clearly, no sane, intelligent, rational, intellectually honest person could accept such rubbish. Clearly, Bill is lacking sanity, intellect, reason or honesty. I’ll not speculate which.

But Then bill adds, in response to rightly being given the Godwin line by James.

“Forget Godwin and study history. I do not think it is a long stretch at all to see the possibility of a repeat of Germany in the 1930s. I am not saying it will happen now with Obama, but there is no reason why it cannot happen in some similar circumstances at some point.”

(Bill Muehlenberg, 2008)

Yes, but what reason do we have to suppose that Obama is more likely a candidate than anyone else? Or indeed, anyone else promising liberty and giving eloquent speeches.

You hear the same fallacious dross often being spouted about Martin Luther King Jr, who gave eloquent speeches about liberty. Why not Thomas Jefferson and George Washington as well?

Of course, Bill tells us to forget Godwin’s law, because apparently its message that the history of WWII Germany shouldn’t be trivialised for political gain, lest said history lose its capacity to teach us, isn’t important.

Trivialising totalitarianism apparently doesn’t matter, make all the spurious and fallacious associations you want. The spectre of NAZI Germany is just a political opportunity to people like Muehlenberg and Adamthwaite.

If they were serious about combating actual fascist concerns, they would be far more vigilant in their own backyard here in the religious right of Australia.

Enter Nick Griffin of the British National Party (BNP). A genuine fascist. An anti-democracy, holocaust denying, pro-racial-violence (which he’s served time for), anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, totalitarian, nasty piece of work.

He wants to come into Australia, and as I’ve opined, I think he should be let in owing to our capacity to handle debating against his fascist politics (rather than give him victim status). That and the opportunity for the local political dialogue to get some practice facing of against these kinds of notions (think of it as inoculation against fascist memes.)

Furthermore, I want his local associates perpetually criticised for their alliance with his brand of politics, long after he is gone.

Obviously though, if he breaks the law by promoting violence when here, I want him turfed.

Alan Matheson, who has on occasion kept me updated of such issues (thanks Alan), writes of the interface between religion and the fascist BNP in the UK;

“The Church of England, for example, has attacked the BNP funded, “Christian Council of Great Britain”, for presenting a racist agenda as Christian, and appropriating Christian language and symbols, which are the very opposite of Christian values.”

(Alan Matheson, 2008)

Bill Muehlenberg needs to realise that this is what a modern implementation of fascism looks like. Through the Christian Council of Great Britain, Griffin’s fascist nasties are appropriating Christendom the way the NAZI party did in the form of Positive Christianity.

If not as an opponent of totalitarianism (where Bill has no cred), Bill should be concerned given his self-appointed watchdog status for Christian culture.

Bill and friends should be keeping an eye on good-Christian Griffin if he gets let into Australia. There has been a cross-over between elements of the Australian Christian Right vote (fortunately gutted in the last election when evangelicals rebelled) and that of totalitarian parties such as the Australian Protectionist Party, the Democratic Labor Party and Fred Nile’s Christian Democratic Party. Next time you vote, just look which way the preferences flow through these minor parties.

Indeed, if Muehlenberg and friends want to apply their liberty-fallacy canard evenly, all of these parties profess to want to provide liberty for Australians. However, unlike Obama, they demonstrably want to take away a whole raft of liberties on the grounds that allowing difference somehow oppresses them (take gay marriage for example – by allowing it, somehow it is oppressing heterosexuals/Christians in the views of these parties).

The Christian right lobby groups in Australia have the same undeniable character; the demented “their mere freedom oppresses my freedom” parsing of liberty (the same demented version argued by fascists since the dawn of fascism, but not the same argued for by Obama, Jefferson, Luther King Jr. or Washington), rampant xenophobia (particularly of Muslims at the moment) and homophobia.

The Australian Christian lobby is exemplarly in these respects. Oh wait! That last one was written by Bill! Maybe he needs to watch himself a bit more closely, and while he’s at it, he should read this.

Catch the Fire Ministries owes its notoriety to the very same.

It’s not just the anti-liberty psychology or the policy points that are the same either. So are the tactics.

Alan Matheson writes;

“The APP distributes leaflets, “Do you want your children to grow up in a Muslim Australia: Islam is a religion of Arabic race and culture and its way of life should not be pushed on Australia”.

The Reverend Fred Nile, leader of the Christian Democratic Party,(CDP) wants to redefine Muslim religion as a “religious-political ideology” and campaigns for a total ban on Muslim migration…

The APP distributes “Women and Islam” leaflets, saying that “Mohammad beat his wife”, and “Allah will torture single mums”. Catch the Fire Ministries, took out newspaper adverts warning that if Barack Obama got elected, with “his Islamic background”, he would drive America away from its Christian heritage and destiny…

The Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) and the Compass Foundation, with the support of Christian Schools Australia and Christian Parent Controlled Schools, are currently recruiting year 12 students for their 2009 “world view conference”. Darrell Furgason, a speaker at past “world view” conferences, has Muslims, “burning churches and butchering Christians”, and Islam as a major threat to Christianity.”

(Alan Matheson, 2008)

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not opposed to criticism of Islam (with criticisms relevant to its various iterations) but there is criticism and then their is fatuous, fallacious, xenophobic, overly-general hate mongering. ACL and the like are engaged in the later, make no mistake.

Clearly, while the Australian Protectionist Party isn’t overtly Christian, they share a lot in common with the Australian Christian right. And the Australian political right with the BNP and more so its more marketable Christian Council of Great Britain. The similarities aren’t trivial either.

Nick Griffin is of course, wanting to come to Australia to talk about the Muslim Terror^tm, at the bequest of the Australian Protectionist Party. Perhaps things like this are why they meet with the apparent approval of much of the Stormfront community. Stormfront being a community of like-minded white supremacists.

One can’t help but notice the material similarities. Maybe Bill can get Nick to give a talk on how homosexuality and the tolerance of Muslims, is oppressing Christians.

Or maybe he could just start treating the threats posed by genuine totalitarian ideology more seriously, and stop projecting the deficiencies of his right-wing coreligionists onto his opponents.

~ Bruce