American traitor and coward writes communist book

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
The New York Times
Printer Friendly Format Sponsored By

March 19, 2006
'American Theocracy,' by Kevin Phillips
Clear and Present Dangers
Review by ALAN BRINKLEY

Four decades ago, Kevin Phillips, a young political strategist for the Republican Party, began work on what became a remarkable book. In writing "The Emerging Republican Majority" (published in 1969), he asked a very big question about American politics: How would the demographic and economic changes of postwar America shape the long-term future of the two major parties? His answer, startling at the time but now largely unquestioned, is that the movement of people and resources from the old Northern industrial states into the South and the West (an area he enduringly labeled the "Sun Belt") would produce a new and more conservative Republican majority that would dominate American politics for decades. Phillips viewed the changes he predicted with optimism. A stronger Republican Party, he believed, would restore stability and order to a society experiencing disorienting and at times violent change. Shortly before publishing his book, he joined the Nixon administration to help advance the changes he had foreseen.

Phillips has remained a prolific and important political commentator in the decades since, but he long ago abandoned his enthusiasm for the Republican coalition he helped to build. His latest book (his 13th) looks broadly and historically at the political world the conservative coalition has painstakingly constructed over the last several decades. No longer does he see Republican government as a source of stability and order. Instead, he presents a nightmarish vision of ideological extremism, catastrophic fiscal irresponsibility, rampant greed and dangerous shortsightedness. (His final chapter is entitled "The Erring Republican Majority.") In an era of best-selling jeremiads on both sides of the political divide, "American Theocracy" may be the most alarming analysis of where we are and where we may be going to have appeared in many years. It is not without polemic, but unlike many of the more glib and strident political commentaries of recent years, it is extensively researched and for the most part frighteningly persuasive.

Although Phillips is scathingly critical of what he considers the dangerous policies of the Bush administration, he does not spend much time examining the ideas and behavior of the president and his advisers. Instead, he identifies three broad and related trends — none of them new to the Bush years but all of them, he believes, exacerbated by this administration's policies — that together threaten the future of the United States and the world. One is the role of oil in defining and, as Phillips sees it, distorting American foreign and domestic policy. The second is the ominous intrusion of radical Christianity into politics and government. And the third is the astonishing levels of debt — current and prospective — that both the government and the American people have been heedlessly accumulating. If there is a single, if implicit, theme running through the three linked essays that form this book, it is the failure of leaders to look beyond their own and the country's immediate ambitions and desires so as to plan prudently for a darkening future.

The American press in the first days of the Iraq war reported extensively on the Pentagon's failure to post American troops in front of the National Museum in Baghdad, which, as a result, was looted of many of its great archaeological treasures. Less widely reported, but to Phillips far more meaningful, was the immediate posting of troops around the Iraqi Oil Ministry, which held the maps and charts that were the key to effective oil production. Phillips fully supports an explanation of the Iraq war that the Bush administration dismisses as conspiracy theory — that its principal purpose was to secure vast oil reserves that would enable the United States to control production and to lower prices. ("Think of Iraq as a military base with a very large oil reserve underneath," an oil analyst said a couple of years ago. "You can't ask for better than that.") Terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, tyranny, democracy and other public rationales were, Phillips says, simply ruses to disguise the real motivation for the invasion.

And while this argument may be somewhat too simplistic to explain the complicated mix of motives behind the war, it is hard to dismiss Phillips's larger argument: that the pursuit of oil has for at least 30 years been one of the defining elements of American policy in the world; and that the Bush administration — unusually dominated by oilmen — has taken what the president deplored recently as the nation's addiction to oil to new and terrifying levels. The United States has embraced a kind of "petro-imperialism," Phillips writes, "the key aspect of which is the U.S. military's transformation into a global oil-protection force," and which "puts up a democratic facade, emphasizes freedom of the seas (or pipeline routes) and seeks to secure, protect, drill and ship oil, not administer everyday affairs."

Phillips is especially passionate in his discussion of the second great force that he sees shaping contemporary American life — radical Christianity and its growing intrusion into government and politics. The political rise of evangelical Christian groups is hardly a secret to most Americans after the 2004 election, but Phillips brings together an enormous range of information from scholars and journalists and presents a remarkably comprehensive and chilling picture of the goals and achievements of the religious right.

He points in particular to the Southern Baptist Convention, once a scorned seceding minority of the American Baptist Church but now so large that it dominates not just Baptism itself but American Protestantism generally. The Southern Baptist Convention does not speak with one voice, but almost all of its voices, Phillips argues, are to one degree or another highly conservative. On the far right is a still obscure but, Phillips says, rapidly growing group of "Christian Reconstructionists" who believe in a "Taliban-like" reversal of women's rights, who describe the separation of church and state as a "myth" and who call openly for a theocratic government shaped by Christian doctrine. A much larger group of Protestants, perhaps as many as a third of the population, claims to believe in the supposed biblical prophecies of an imminent "rapture" — the return of Jesus to the world and the elevation of believers to heaven.

Prophetic Christians, Phillips writes, often shape their view of politics and the world around signs that charlatan biblical scholars have identified as predictors of the apocalypse — among them a war in Iraq, the Jewish settlement of the whole of biblical Israel, even the rise of terrorism. He convincingly demonstrates that the Bush administration has calculatedly reached out to such believers and encouraged them to see the president's policies as a response to premillennialist thought. He also suggests that the president and other members of his administration may actually believe these things themselves, that religious belief is the basis of policy, not just a tactic for selling it to the public. Phillips's evidence for this disturbing claim is significant, but not conclusive.

THE third great impending crisis that Phillips identifies is also, perhaps, the best known — the astonishing rise of debt as the precarious underpinning of the American economy. He is not, of course, the only observer who has noted the dangers of indebtedness. The New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, for example, frequently writes about the looming catastrophe. So do many more-conservative economists, who point especially to future debt — particularly the enormous obligation, which Phillips estimates at between $30 trillion and $40 trillion, that Social Security and health care demands will create in the coming decades. The most familiar debt is that of the United States government, fueled by soaring federal budget deficits that have continued (with a brief pause in the late 1990's) for more than two decades. But the national debt — currently over $8 trillion — is only the tip of the iceberg. There has also been an explosion of corporate debt, state and local bonded debt, international debt through huge trade imbalances, and consumer debt (mostly in the form of credit-card balances and aggressively marketed home-mortgage packages). Taken together, this present and future debt may exceed $70 trillion.

The creation of a national-debt culture, Phillips argues, although exacerbated by the policies of the Bush administration, has been the work of many people over many decades — among them Alan Greenspan, who, he acidly notes, blithely and irresponsibly ignored the rising debt to avoid pricking the stock-market bubble it helped produce. It is most of all a product of the "financialization" of the American economy — the turn away from manufacturing and toward an economy based on moving and managing money, a trend encouraged, Phillips argues persuasively, by the preoccupation with oil and (somewhat less persuasively) with evangelical belief in the imminent rapture, which makes planning for the future unnecessary.

There is little in "American Theocracy" that is wholly original to Phillips, as he frankly admits by his frequent reference to the work of other writers and scholars. What makes this book powerful in spite of the familiarity of many of its arguments is his rare gift for looking broadly and structurally at social and political change. By describing a series of major transformations, by demonstrating the relationships among them and by discussing them with passionate restraint, Phillips has created a harrowing picture of national danger that no American reader will welcome, but that none should ignore.

Alan Brinkley is the Allan Nevins professor of history and the provost at Columbia University.

*
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
I think not said:
"American Theocracy"

More oxymorons from the fringe.

Jesus Christ (oops) ITN this guy was practcally concieved and delivered in the whitehouse eh, how far right do you have to be to think he's from the fringe eh? I think you might have to be from some other fringe eh. If you don't like American Theocrascy then how about American Freemockcracy eh. And technically American Therocracy is not an oxymoron eh, your're beginning lie to us ITN.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
Uh... I think I don't get it, darkbeaver. Does the thread title indicate that you believe Kevin Phillips is a traitor and coward and his book is supportive of communism? There's nothing in the book review you cited to justify that, so exactly what is your point here?
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
*Faith-based politics/programs
*Intelligent Design - anti evolution
*"Compassionate" Conservative
*Anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment proposal
*Roe V Wade battle for the SCOTUS
*The Terry Schiavo emergency congress session
*Anti-stemcell funding
*politicizing the 10 commandents issues on gov property "The In God We Trust" campaign.

Theocracy may be an exaggeration but it is entirely obvious the Republicans have implemented religion into government policies and politics.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
RE: American traitor and

Ya Kreskin, gimmie dat ole time religon, gimmie dat ole time religion hahahahahahahahhehehehehehhahahaha crazy country! Rapture gonna lift us all to heaven baby jesus coming back hahahahahehehehe christofacsists totalitarian Jesus Freaks.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
Re: RE: American traitor and

darkbeaver said:
The point is DS that if you believe what MR Phillips writes about America is true you're a traitor to America.

Love it or leave it? If you're not with us you're against us? Bullshit. Or more respectfully, false dichotomies. There are other options. You're simply branding someone you disagree with with emotionally loaded labels in order to discredit him.

You folks at the extremes of left and right are very quick to invoke the very liberal ideals of freedom of speech and association and expression in defence of your own views, and equally quick to deny them to others who disagree with you. Is it not possible that Mr. Phillips has something useful and important to say? By labelling him like that you've denied the legitimacy of anything he says without actually dealing with it, and in fact you're just denying any need to deal with it.

There are labels for that too: bigotry and ignorance.
 

Finder

House Member
Dec 18, 2005
3,786
0
36
Toronto
www.mytimenow.net
I don't know. The Christian bloq of the Republican party is pretty much in power. It's amazing when you look at the Republican conventions and the Christian right "power sundays" or justice sunday" or whatever they are calling it these days. Even though they have all the power the US government they can get they still act as if they don't have the power. They are always talking about how there rights are being attacked and always crap talking the democrats... It's amazing how they can take such stances when the democrats have the power to only bitch and whin! and they have the ability to do almost anything they wish.

I don't think The USA is really a theocracy but it is still has not seperated church and state. Whenever there is a judgment in favour of such the Christian right is always there crying fowl too.

Right now one of the big issues is the teaching of evolution and .... creation. creation theory no matter how much you believe it, no matter how right you think it is, is a religous belief and not on of science no matter how much Chrsitian Scientists wish to twist the theory. Creation should be taught in theocracy cources, of course and evolution doesn't really have a place in those courses, but when it comes to science, creation has no, zero place in this.

As stated above this is a big battle right now in many states and it shouldn't be in a nation which believes in the seperation of church and state. Thuse seculerism is truly under attack in the USA as science progresses. Even though I may believe in relilous idea's I will always side with seculerism in government/school and so on.
 

Curiosity

Senate Member
Jul 30, 2005
7,326
138
63
California
One of the most common Canadian phrases I read is: "Americans are so ignorant about other countries - they know nothing about Canada"....

This whole thread is the challenge in reverse. A collection of uninformed and rather doubtful statements from those who are apparently the blind leading the blind into their netherworld of fingerpointing, silly myth and puffery.

Nursery rhyme material....Mother Goose is alive and well! No doubt this decade of Canadiana Lore will be their Fantastic Fables told about the U.S. and its people.

Boo!
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
Wednesday's Child said:
One of the most common Canadian phrases I read is: "Americans are so ignorant about other countries - they know nothing about Canada"....

This whole thread is the challenge in reverse. A collection of uninformed and rather doubtful statements from those who are apparently the blind leading the blind into their netherworld of fingerpointing, silly myth and puffery.

Nursery rhyme material....Mother Goose is alive and well! No doubt this decade of Canadiana Lore will be their Fantastic Fables told about the U.S. and its people.

Boo!

Lefties hate America, we just have to learn to deal with their hatred and hope despite it we can keep good relations between our nations.

Thank God that the Liberal (who run platforms on anti-Americanism) are out.
 

Curiosity

Senate Member
Jul 30, 2005
7,326
138
63
California
Jay

I have seen this devolve over the past seven or more years - for whatever reasons Canada has decided to define itself through the door of dislike, comparison and accusation. It seems the farther into socialism and government control the country allows, the farther the people will experience a sense of loss of direction.

It is imperative that people understand they are leading their country - and the government is doing their work, providing their leadership at the will of the people.

It isn't the Canada I know and care about - the people who would give their lives and open their homes to anyone from any part of the world have now turned inward and direct to the south all the disappointments they have stored up - to a group of strangers they know so little about.

I believe it is because Canadians feel "safe" in hating Americans ....
( or rather if you wish to politicize it - liberals feel safe in hating what they deem as tyrannical Jesus monsters or something in the U.S. )..... because they know nothing will come of it and it is a
release they can enjoy to displace the frustrations of where their own nation is headed. It is a witless exercise because the U.S. is so deeply divided within itself, Canada's dislike and commentary is a blip on the large screen.

I would much rather see Canada so busy inventing and investing in its vision for the future for itself, than spending so much time commiserating regularly upon what the U.S. is up to.....

The U.S. doesn't know itself at this point in our lifetimes. Maybe one day we will sit in our armchairs and read about these events and I hope there is a happy ending.
 

zoofer

Council Member
Dec 31, 2005
1,274
2
38
Lefty Canada should take a break from dissing America and spend some time on the countries we love and admire.
Cuba, Venezula, France, Iran, Bolivia, Syria and North Korea.
Discuss our commonalities, our shared disdain of the USA.

Make that Venezuela