Nationalism, Crusades, and Anti-Semitism

Just learned that today is both Holocaust Remembrance Day and the March for Life. The latter is on a different date each year, the former is always on January 27, commemorating the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp in 1945.

Many seem to think that the Nazis rose to power in some backward, unrefined place.

But Germany in the 1930's was the most educated country in the world, according to historian Paul Johnson. A culturally advanced, learned people allowed a monster to take control of the government, and two state supported churches - Catholic and Lutheran - helped the regime scapegoat Jews. Thank God for some exceptions (Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the Confessing Church), but the sad truth is that anti-Semitism has its historical roots in "Christian" churches.

If the church doesn't exist to stop tyranny like Hitler, what is the church here for? I am not reassured by the blind allegiance to Trump among Evangelicals - the spirit of nationalism is foul smelling and not easily reined in once loosed.

I've been studying the Crusades lately, and learning some things I didn't want to know.

To wit:

In 1095, Pope Urban II called Christians to a crusade to take Jerusalem from the Muslims. En route, the Crusaders learned to love killing, including entire Jewish villages. They started out hating the Muslims as "enemies of Christ" and along the way many of them decided that Jews were "enemies of Christ" as well. These demonic hordes, marching in the name of our Lord, were the source of blood libels and pogroms, and the evil and stupid idea of blaming all Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus.

When the Crusaders arrived at Jerusalem in 1099, they not only slaughtered Muslims within the city, but also Jews as well. The Muslims had banned Christians because they were regarded as polytheists for adhering to the doctrine of the Trinity.

Interesting to me is the fact that Jews were banned from Jerusalem until Muslims retook the city in 1187. Saladin invited them back to the city, and also allowed Christians from Greek and Eastern churches to remain, because they had not persecuted Muslims.

It seems that anti-Semitism has been more prevalent among "Christians" throughout history than it has been among Muslims, with notable exceptions.

Spiritually speaking, I observe the same filthy spirit in today's anti-Muslim crusade as inhabited the anti-Muslim crusades of the middle ages. I hope it doesn't redound to a new wave of anti-Semitism, although it apparently already has in parts of Europe. There were neo-Nazis among those who staged the Ukrainian coup that our government and NATO backed during Hillary Clinton's tenure at the State department. It also is not helpful for our government and evangelical Christians to blindly support Netanyahu's oppression of Palestinians, or the demonization of the entire Persian/ Iranian race.

This is a heart issue. Stereotyping of any one ethnic or religious group tends to snowball into hatred of other groups. Pope Urban II called forth a mob against Muslims. He didn't intend for the mob to go after Jews, but he was powerless to restrain the juggernaut he had launched.

Do we ever learn?

The answer is blowing in the wind?

Marxist Left, Fascist Right: Twins!

Last week, a self described "liberal" accused me of blind allegiance to Ron Paul.

Today, a "Conservative Animal" (blog name) called me a "paulie" (sic).

For the record, I do agree with Ron Paul, but my opinions were largely in line with his before I began to pay much attention to him, about six years ago. Plus, whatever is wrong with my opinions, a lot of thoughts go into them, and so ad hominem arguments are resented, chiefly because they indicate no respect for my time.

The "Left - Right" paradigm in which we frame political discussions seems more absurd to me everyday.

.
"Left" and "Right" have much more in common than their shared disdain for the simple honesty of Ron Paul.

* They both have the exact same plan to deal with our national debt problem - blame the other party.
* Democrats spoke against Bush's military adventurism; Republicans decry Obama's. But in the end, both keep funding our unsustainable worldwide military presence.
* Neither has any respect for the Constitution: Conservative Animal is offended by the confidence with which Ron Paul supporters cite the Constitution (it's our fault that hardly anyone else reads it?), and  thinks the Federal courts are the sole arbiters of its meaning. Animal thus affirms the hubris of Chief Justice Hughes: "...we are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is..." My "liberal" critic thinks the Constitution is subservient to popular opinion, and inadequate for modern life, and since his view is shared by the statists who dominate the federal judiciary, he, like Conservative Animal, is happy for our country to be governed by de facto tribunals of judges.
* Both quickly play the race card when they have no answers: the liberal thinks objections to Obama's massive expansion of the federal government is rooted in racism; Conservative Animal accused me of being anti-Semitic because I think Israel deliberately attacked the USS Liberty in 1967. Since I didn't mention the Liberty attack in my post on Mr. Animal's blog, I'm guessing somebody searched out my comments about it elsewhere online. I'm opting out of participation on that blog, as the proprieters are given to overbearing and verbose tirades full of ad hominem arguments, red herring, and ipse dixit assertions posing as axioms. See for yourself here.
* Both are ignorant of, or OK with, the President having authority to imprison American citizens indefinitely without charging them.

The Left side of the box is still the box. Ditto the right side.

Ron Paul's ideas are not really profound. He just cuts through the bullshit; and millions of people are ready for someone to do that.

Unfortunately, many more millions are still thinking in the box.

Pray and think. Please.